Re: What are the problems with IDML?

:>I've heard one other person say that they aren't SGML enough, now
:>I hear this. Can someone please be specific about the problems.
:>Can someone give me an example or suggest better alternatives 
:>that do bypass the biggest reason that they went around META
:>tags to begin with - namely the cumbersomeness of such long
:>round about definitions.
:>I'd really like to understand the details of why they aren't 

Because they're really not needed?


    <meta name="keywords" content="Foo Widgets - Model #12354">
    <meta name="author" content="Matthew James Marnell">
    <meta name="author-email" content="matt@portia.com">
    <meta name="product-name" content="Foo Widgets - Model #12354">
    <meta name="product-cat" content="consumer-electronics/other">
    <meta name="product-keywords" content="Foo Widgets - Model #12354">
    <meta name="product-desc" content="The best darned widget for all your 
needs!  New and Improved!">
    <meta name="product-price" content="52.99">

may be longer than:

               DESCRIPTION="The best darned widget for 
                       all your needs! New and 
               NAME="Foo Widgets - Model #12354"
               KEYWORDS="Foo Widgets - Model #12354"

It may possibly be more useful to a greater number of search tools
and less preprietary to Identify.

Of course then there is no way to enforce the required fields and
Identify is reduced to the same level as all the other search
engines, with the possible perk that they've identified certain
META names that are standard requirements to their engine, but
in the end, it's much easier for other engines to pick up the
same details and run with them just as easily and standardize
on other META names to make it just a little less confusing
than IDML is.  That wouldn't be good.


Follow-Ups: References: