W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > May 2003

Re: Semantic versus Structure for XHTML 2.0

From: Johannes Koch <koch@w3development.de>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2003 22:50:40 +0200
Message-ID: <3EC3FDA0.3000209@w3development.de>
To: www-html@w3.org

Karl Dubost wrote:
> We could try to identify all the elements we need to put in HTML, but I 
> think it will a huge amount of work and necessary useful.
> 
> I would encourage a solution where the XHTML spec becomes just a 
> structure spec, with Paragraphs, lines, etc and not semantics at all.

OK.

> We should put the semantics in an attribute with to extend a set of 
> normative values outside of the spec.
> 
> So it will become an extensible mechanism.
> 
> <p sem="address">
> <l sem="person">Haruki Murakami</l>
> <l sem="street">Omote-Sando</l>
> <l sem="city">    Tokyo</l>
> </p>

which could be achieved in HTML 4.01:
<div class="address">
<div class="person">Haruki Murakami</div>
<div class="street">Omote-Sando</div>
<div class="city">    Tokyo</div>
</div>

> The values of sem attribute and their meaning will be defined in a 
> external extensible document.

The values of the class attribute and their meaning will be defined in a 
external extensible document.


A better approach in _X_HTML (IMHO) would be the usage of elements from 
a special namespace for an address vocabulary:

<p><foo:address">
<l><foo:person>Haruki Murakami</foo:person></l>
<l><foo:street>Omote-Sando</foo:street></l>
<l><foo:city>    Tokyo</foo:city></l>
</foo:address></p>

This of course would not be a fragment of a valid XHTML 2.0 document. 
But XHTML is meant to be extended like this, isn't it?
-- 
Johannes Koch
In te domine speravi; non confundar in aeternum.
                             (Te Deum, 4th cent.)
Received on Friday, 16 May 2003 03:39:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:15:55 GMT