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

Re: Proposal: Checkpoint 2.2: Move information about textformats from Note to checkpoint

From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2001 12:20:49 -0500
Message-ID: <3AB63FF1.5BCCD50B@w3.org>
To: Harvey Bingham <hbingham@acm.org>
CC: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Harvey Bingham wrote (about the text formats definition of checkpoint
2.2):
> 
> I like the idea. Is it too open-ended? Some SGML applications may be
> problematic: they may use exotic features of SGML that few systems
> can support.
> 
> That ",etc." can let in a bag of worms.

The "etc." is only part of the list of examples, so I don't
think it's the culprit. Perhaps it's the "all" in
"all SGML and XML applications regardless of Internet Media Type."

> The following may claim
> to have XML-based "save-as" even though they may include proprietary
> content. A Note should mention that properly left out are
> proprietary extensions and formats like Adobe.pdf, MSWord.doc,
> WordPerfect.wpd, etc.]

Is "proprietary" really the distinguishing factor? I don't mind
that PostScript is proprietary since the format is open. Is there
a technical characteristic (or more than one) to these formats
that we can/should point to?

 - Ian


-- 
Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org)   http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs
Tel:                         +1 831 457-2842
Cell:                        +1 917 450-8783
Received on Monday, 19 March 2001 12:21:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:49:29 UTC