[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Subject: Re: [tm-pubsubj] Recommendations for PubSubj Documentation - version0.2
Lars Marius Garshol wrote: > > I think this draft is still *very* rough and incomplete, but it does > represent a step forward. It seems that the next issue for us to > decide is that of recommended syntax for the PSD and SDRs. I think we > should recommend a syntax, but also to derive some syntax-independent > general guidelines. We're not there yet, though. I'm still unconvinced that a new syntax is necessary, or even a good idea. I don't want to stand in the way of progress if I'm the only person who feels this way, but I continue to think that recommending metadata additions to XHTML (but still within XHTML's syntax) is the kind of thing that (a) doesn't require new syntax, its development, promulgation, and acceptance, (b) doesn't require new tools, documentation, or education, and (c) is simple and already exists. Last year I published a recommendation on adding metadata (Dublin Core, in fact, though any would be possible) to XHTML documents. I think some parts of this spec could be useful for the PubSubj TC's needs: http://www.doctypes.org/meta/NOTE-xhtml-augmeta.html I just think we're going to get an uphill battle trying to get anyone to use a new syntax when we have at least three (XTM, XHTML and RDF) that could serve in this capacity. Murray ........................................................................... Murray Altheim <mailto:murray.altheim@sun.com> XML Technology Center, Java and XML Software Sun Microsystems, Inc., MS MPK17-102, 1601 Willow Rd., Menlo Park, CA 94025 Corporations do not have human rights, despite the altogether too-human opinions of the US Supreme Court.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [Elist Home]
Powered by eList eXpress LLC