W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-wai-gl@w3.org > January to March 2001

Re: Layout tables

From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
Date: Fri, 09 Mar 2001 12:17:33 -0500
Message-Id: <200103091657.LAA5675695@smtp2.mail.iamworld.net>
To: <w3c-wai-gl@w3.org>
At 11:24 AM 2001-03-09 -0500, Marti wrote:
>There is the "rub".  I can define good reason for the use of XML, but the
>"execution" is at this point pretty messy.  XHTML has better support but
>what real world reason is there for people to take the extra steps to
>implement that?


I don't know if this is going to help you with your contacts who consider that
they are developing "Web" content.  If they only think about the desktop as
target device, they won't necessarily care because desktop browsers already
implement the mountains of parsing code to deal with sloppy syntax.

On the other hand, while WAP content may some day be just another application
of XHTML Basic, mobile devices will probably never accept or attempt to
resurrect any content that is not well-formed XML.  So the principal customers
for XML at the moment are people like those in the X-Forms group who already
have decided that they want to transact the same business processes over
devices large and small.  

And furthermore, I don't think you should be worrying about getting them to
XML.  On the EO front, it is much more important to communication the critical
roles of labels for form controls and other forms of built-in documentation in
the content.  It is the content relationships that are critical for access,
more than the specific choice of syntactic wrapping.  If the content is there,
the relationships need to be captured, but there is ususally a way in HTML to
do so.

Received on Friday, 9 March 2001 11:58:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 16 January 2018 15:33:36 UTC