- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Fri, 4 May 2007 18:09:36 +0300
- To: Philip & Le Khanh <Philip-and-LeKhanh@Royal-Tunbridge-Wells.Org>
- Cc: www-html@w3.org, public-html@w3.org
On May 3, 2007, at 23:35, Philip & Le Khanh wrote: > I believe we should provide the functionality to allow an > author to add his/her own preferred semantic markup, since the > one things on which I am confident we /all/ agree is that a finite > set of elements can never carry all the possible semantic nuances > that an author might wish to convey. Focusing on authors wanting to convey things is a common fallacy in semantic markup advocacy. Semantic markup is about communication between parties. The purpose of Web specs is to establish a common understanding between all parties so that a priori bilateral agreements between particular authors and markup consumers are not needed. If you pull "semantic" markup from your sleeve, the consumer has no way of knowing what you mean without a prior agreement. Suppose I send your UA this: <kappale>This is <korostettu>important</korostettu>!</kappale> how is your UA going to implement behavior appropriate for the semantics of the elements without either a) a spec for this markup language and a human implementing behavior for it in your UA or b) artificial intelligence that reads Finnish ? Perhaps the problem is that the semantics are expressed in Finnish, but so far UAs don't have English AI, either. -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Friday, 4 May 2007 15:09:50 UTC