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

Re: Best citation format for accessibility

From: Robin Berjon <robin@berjon.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2015 16:29:48 -0400
Message-ID: <5601BA3C.90007@berjon.com>
To: Bill Kasdorf <bkasdorf@apexcovantage.com>, "public-digipub-ig@w3.org" <public-digipub-ig@w3.org>
On 22/09/2015 15:36 , Bill Kasdorf wrote:
> Agreed, starting from CrossRef is fine and arguably best, because
> that's how both citations and article metadata are made resolvable.
> This is just the direction I was hoping for! And aren't the resulting
> semantics (as shown by the example in your previous e-mail) useful
> for AT? Seems to me that's just what AT would want.

In many ways, yes, it's exactly what AT would want. But to the best of
my knowledge AT doesn't make use of that sort of semantics just yet, and
I don't know that anyone is entirely clear on how it could. So we have
to make do with what's at the raw HTML level.

-- 
• Robin Berjon - http://berjon.com/ - @robinberjon
• http://science.ai/ — intelligent science publishing
•
Received on Tuesday, 22 September 2015 20:30:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:36:12 UTC