W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-digipub-ig@w3.org > April 2015

Re: case for abstract?

From: Heather Flanagan (RFC Series Editor) <rse@rfc-editor.org>
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 2015 07:37:25 -0700
Message-ID: <552D2625.8070509@rfc-editor.org>
To: "public-digipub-ig@w3.org" <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>
CC: "public-dpub-aria@w3.org" <public-dpub-aria@w3.org>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256

FWIW, technical standards may use an abstract as well (e.g., all RFCs
must have an Abstract).  The Series started with strong ties to
academia, but I wouldn't label it as such today.

- -Heather Flanagan

On 4/14/15 7:29 AM, Bill Kasdorf wrote:
>
> I agree that abstract is most commonly used in publishing in scholarly
content, and there, almost always in journals. Books are just now
beginning to acquire abstracts (in the past very few books contained
them, though some did), and there they are often treated as metadata,
not rendered content. In a journal article, an abstract is almost always
a clearly distinguished structural element in the rendered
content—which, btw, almost always has a heading identifying it
explicitly as the abstract, which of course AT would read. And even
then, in JATS, the XML model overwhelmingly used for almost all journal
articles, the article abstract is in the <article-meta>, the "metadata
header" at the beginning of every JATS XML article, from which it is
retrieved for rendering. (Figures and tables can also have <abstract>s.)
>
> 
>
> So imo there are better reasons to exclude "abstract" from the
vocabulary than to include it, given the conflict with ARIA's use of the
term.
>
> 
>
> *From:*Matt Garrish [mailto:matt.garrish@bell.net]
> *Sent:* Monday, April 13, 2015 10:30 PM
> *To:* public-digipub-ig@w3.org
> *Cc:* public-dpub-aria@w3.org
> *Subject:* Re: case for abstract?
>
> 
>
> Oops, meant to send this to the dpub ig, but keeping both lists on
since it seems appropriate to both...
>
> 
>
> *From:*Matt Garrish <mailto:matt.garrish@bell.net>
>
> *Sent:*Monday, April 13, 2015 10:26 PM
>
> *To:*public-dpub-aria@w3.org <mailto:public-dpub-aria@w3.org>
>
> *Subject:*case for abstract?
>
> 
>
> In the interests of solving abstract, the first question I’d ask is:
is it critical for the first iteration of this vocabulary?
>
> 
>
> It was a term that was introduced in epub for education, and it seems
more suited to scholarly and education publishing. I’m not even sure the
last time I spotted an abstract outside of those contexts, or
specifications, at any rate. We’re not trying to cover everything, and
there are absences like dedication that seem more commonly usable.
>
> 
>
> Should it be punted to future discussions about stem/scholarly, as
we’ve similarly passed on assessments, learning-* and statement?
>
> 
>
> And if anyone is using it currently in their EPUBs, please feel free
to make a case for or against swapping in summary. I’ve said my fill on
where I think we’ll run into ambiguity with that term in the other
thread, but I don’t have any skin in the game and talking theory is
about as useful as spouting hot air.
>
> 
>
> Matt
>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG/MacGPG2 v2
Comment: GPGTools - http://gpgtools.org

iQEcBAEBCAAGBQJVLSYlAAoJEER/xjINbZoGONMIALF8Vk1lpmOilN4/z9vssZfN
tz4IDjvqkhrXEzhFp4AzB7YoeDIjq9P456HJw/phy2jynHbI4C56MKhlOjsf1f/Q
fXva3Cyn+9dpIe0RLDShrLF7Ghtma4M5vP4EN8s0DCYmraNv13X/aWf9xwR45Aij
+C+ZsXe+saesur+yIq9YgXdNgZE12XN3fLl8HmZ6kXvIcKnOiCC3hEKJiKBAQnQs
bsvvCDrnYbHfyquW4OC7rlLs7zBoVHP0dlxKmlrQPGn5GDT492wf+mS0fEYDJL6j
Z2fFJuIA/FpDPSNBBr7B3pP9ZJOt2x9jw9ldGShoegJX+XM3GWtfUCyqzoVpDns=
=w/Jj
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Tuesday, 14 April 2015 14:38:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:35:59 UTC