Re: html for scholarly communication: RASH, Scholarly HTML or Dokieli? from Sarven Capadisli on 2017-09-09 (public-scholarlyhtml@w3.org from September 2017)

From: Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca>
Date: Sat, 9 Sep 2017 19:40:11 +0200
To: public-scholarlyhtml@w3.org
Message-ID: <787a0bdc-d858-f5cb-7a06-3f3f1f6f2c5d@csarven.ca>

On 2017-09-09 17:05, Silvio Peroni wrote:
> For answering Peter: SH-CG should provide a "standard" way of using a
> minimal set of HTML tags for describing a scholarly article
> (independently from the discipline in consideration), and should be
> enough flexible - e.g. via RDFa - to allow users to assign specific
> discipline-oriented semantics to the various tags.
What's the incentive to have a "minimal set of HTML tags"?

How do you make the distinction between a) single element b) "32
elements" (or "25 elements", circa 2015), c) any number of applicable
elements at the discretion of the author since they precisely know what
to encapsulate?

-Sarven
http://csarven.ca/#i

Received on Saturday, 9 September 2017 17:40:35 UTC