- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 10:33:09 -0600
- To: Bill Kasdorf <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>
- Cc: Peter Krautzberger <peter.krautzberger@mathjax.org>, "DPUB-ARIA (public-dpub-aria@w3.org)" <public-dpub-aria@w3.org>, W3C Digital Publishing IG <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAOk_reFzyd8RzHo_zLz=kwxqtkgb31gmrsQHcqQJKS=cNMVdAg@mail.gmail.com>
I don't think we are in a good position to suggest new elements for HTML at this juncture anyway. A new role seems more in scope. And statement is a reasonable one. It has clear, distinct semantics. That's a good litmus test for any new value for @role. On Thu, Feb 19, 2015 at 10:29 AM, Bill Kasdorf <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com> wrote: > +1 but with some further thoughts. And thanks for the mention of > NLM/JATS/BITS which imo has a lot of other handy features of interest > (milestones come immediately to mind, for example, which get you out of the > well-formedness pickle). > > > > One thought on <statement> though: I wonder if it should be a phrase level > element. While you're correct, a "statement" is usually set off quite > clearly (but can occur at any level), I can envision a publisher needing to > identify a formal statement that is contained within a paragraph, for > example. > > > > Here is a possibly relevant use case (but maybe not) from one of my > clients, a standards publisher. Their standards typically begin with a > chapter consisting of formal definitions of terms, and when any of those > terms are used in the content _*in that formal sense*_ (in any form, e.g. > plural or singular, various verb forms, etc.) that word or phrase is > explicitly tagged as such (but not when the same word is used not in that > formal sense), and specially formatted in rendering (bold italic in print, > red online, etc.). So that has the sense of "formal" but it really doesn't > have the sense of "statement." Hmm. > > > > And at the other end of the scale, very complex content can be a formal > statement, as you mentioned: e.g., in law, a judicial ruling, a statute, an > ordinance, etc. > > > > Which makes me wonder if really this shouldn't be a @role attribute value > after all. That way any available structural component of a document can be > designated as a "formal statement" or even just "formal". > > > > --Bill K > > > > *From:* Peter Krautzberger [mailto:peter.krautzberger@mathjax.org] > *Sent:* Thursday, February 19, 2015 10:08 AM > *To:* DPUB-ARIA (public-dpub-aria@w3.org); W3C Digital Publishing IG > *Subject:* role "statement" > > > > Hi, > > > > As per today's DPUB-ARIA call, I wanted to separate out an item from an > earlier discussion in December. > > > > I would like to propose a role "(formal) statement". > > > > Here's a work-in-progress definition. > > > > A minor structural division in a work, typically encapsulated in a major > division. A fragment that is part of the overall flow (i.e., not an aside) > but is distinguished from the surrounding content (often typographically) > and might be referenced elsewhere (in particular, often carries a label). > > > > Among other things, statements are content fragments that might be > aggregated in some form of index (comparable to figures). > > > > Use cases come from humanities (postulate), law (via Bill Kasdorf), > sciences (hypothesis, experiment, ansatz, result, example), math (theorem, > proof, definition, proposition, lemma, corollary). > > > > Statements are similar to figures except it's more textual and never > floating. In HTML5, I'd expect it to be mostly applied to <section> though > <p> or <div> might often work, too. > > > > Looking at the already proposed roles, statement appears a bit meta -- > question, answer, practice seem to be statements, too. For full disclosure, > a <statement> element is part of NLM/JATS/BITS. > > > > Best regards, > > Peter. > -- Shane McCarron Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.
Received on Thursday, 19 February 2015 16:33:37 UTC