W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org > October 2001

Re: HTML friendly links to (browser-friendly reports of) metainformation

From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
Date: Sun, 21 Oct 2001 18:59:45 +0100
Message-ID: <015b01c15a6f$f163be00$763c70c2@7020CT>
To: <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>

>* On the grouping in a 'metadata' element vs. a 'div' --
>[again this is something where the details I am happy to defer to the
HTML WG]
>I claim you should be no more happy with a 'metadata' collector than with
a
>'div' collector in the HEAD section. The 'div' is a pure structuring
>convention without taint of the purpose of the structuring. So it goes in
the
>HEAD just fine.

I have to disagree, conceptually it goes in the head okay, the problem is
in current HTML parsers, they all (certainly the major, and the ones that
serialise for us which I've tested) consider it the start of the "body",
therefore to place it in the head will confuse these, they'll see multiple
bodies, the adding of body attributes will be lost, or confused, or
reliant on error correction.

>So what the portal page processor
>has to understand, and shields the client population from, is the
polyglot
>world of RDF and its various bindings to syntax.

My only problem with this "portal page" concept, is that the control is
not with user, they're simply consumers, whereas I feel strongly that
users can and should be more involved than that, so the linking has to be
appropriate, I'm most concerned about identifying version and type outside
of the RDF.

Jim.
Received on Sunday, 21 October 2001 16:34:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 + w3c-0.30 : Thursday, 9 June 2005 12:10:39 GMT