On 2014-10-01 19:10, Laura Dawson wrote: > What about EPUB, which is xHTML and has support for Schema.org markup? It > also provides for fixed-layout. IMO, this particular discussion is not what we should be focusing on. And, it almost always deters from the main topic. There are a number of ways to get to "Web friendly" representations and presentations. EPUB? Sure. Whatever floats the author's boat. As long as we can precisely identify and be able to discover the items in research papers, that's all fine. I personally don't find the need to set any hard limitations on (X)HTML or which vocabularies to use. So, schema.org is not granular enough at this time. There are more appropriate ones out there e.g: e.g., http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-lod/2014Jul/0179.html , but that doesn't mean that we can't use them along with schema.org. I favour plain HTML+CSS+RDFa to get things going e.g.: https://github.com/csarven/linked-research (I will not dwell on the use of SVG, MathML, JavaScript etc. at this point, but you get the picture). The primary focus right now is to have SW/LD venues compromise i.e., not insist only on Adobe's PDF, but welcome Web native technologies. Debating on which Doctype or vocabulary or whatever is like the icing on the cake. Can we first bring the flour into our kitchen? -Sarven http://csarven.ca/#i
Received on Wednesday, 1 October 2014 18:44:10 UTC