Re: What are the problems with IDML?

Daniel W. Connolly (connolly@w3.org)
Mon, 26 Aug 1996 02:12:52 -0400


Message-Id: <199608260612.CAA10798@anansi.w3.org>
To: Jim Taylor <JHTaylor@videodiscovery.com>
cc: www-html@w3.org
Subject: Re: What are the problems with IDML? 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Fri, 23 Aug 1996 21:07:37 PST."
             <s21e1d9f.065@videodiscovery.com> 
Date: Mon, 26 Aug 1996 02:12:52 -0400
From: "Daniel W. Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>

In message <s21e1d9f.065@videodiscovery.com>, Jim Taylor writes:
>Suggestions:
>
>IDML is already broken into four groups. Three of these groups
>(publisher, info, system) contain meta information that probably belongs
>in META tags or separate documents. This is information such as
>publisher name, location, keywords, robot instructions, etc. Since IDML
>has proposed specific formats for these, then all that's required is a meta
>tag identifying the document as IDML compliant, thus vouchsafing that
>information in the meta tags is in the format expected by an IDML parser.
>Then the information is also available to other parsers that look at meta
>tags.

From the responses in this thread, I get the impression that folks
are not reading the Distributed Indexing and Searching workshop
report. A lot of work went into that report. Please read it.

In fact, anybody who responds to this thread who hasn't read
pretty much all of http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Search/ is
wasting everybody's time.

For example, it proposes a standard mechanism to do _exactly_ what
Taylor suggests: identify the schema of the metainformation used in a
document:

=============
http://www.w3.org/pub/WWW/Search/9605-Indexing-Workshop/ReportOutcomes/S6Group2.html

3. LINKAGE TO THE REFERENCE DESCRIPTION OF A SCHEMA

It is judged useful to provide a means for linking to the reference
definition of a schema as well.  The proposed convention for doing so
is as follows:


<LINK REL = SCHEMA.schema_identifier HREF="URL" >

Thus, the reference description of one metadata scheme, the Dublin
Core Metadata Element Set, would be referenced in the LINK HREF as
follows:

<LINK REL = SCHEMA.dc HREF = "http://purl.org/metadata/dublin_core" >

==========


>The fourth IDML group consists of product information. This really can't
>be shoehorned into meta tags, but instead of making way too many new
>attributes, the IDML guys could create classes. This allows a number of
>things to work nicely. Span tags could be used to identify existing text:
>  <span class="id-product-name>A Hard Day's Night</span> 
>  <span class="id-product-description>Released on CD in 1988.</span>
>  $<span class="id-product-price>13.47</span>
>
>(Is this a misuse of span?)

Nope. In fact, this sort of thing was raised at the workshop, but
we didn't cover it. I suggest we extend the meta convention
in the document above to cover classes, as well as meta names.

So it would be:

	<link rel=schema.idml href="http://..../IDML">
	<meta name="idml.publisher" content="...">

	...

	<span class="idml.product-name">lkjsdjl</span>

(and you could use em or b or any other HTML tag in stead of span, if
you like. The key is class, not the tag name)

>Non-visible information such as currency, keywords, etc. could still be
>contained in IDML tags. Obviously many people will want all the
>information stored in one place.  Instead of using the very goofy
>"url-redirect" attribute, they should use the established id attribute to
>identify each product (in place of the part-number attribute) and then put
>a link element in the header:
>
>  <link rel="IDML" href="whatever">

Another good idea.

>This is a quick spew at the end of a very long day, so it may not be
>coherent or well thought out, but it's certainly more consistent with
>established standard ways of doing these things than the current IDML
>proposal.

Agreed.

Dan