W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-scholarlyhtml@w3.org > September 2017

Re: html for scholarly communication: RASH, Scholarly HTML or Dokieli?

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 09:43:45 +0200
To: Johannes Wilm <johanneswilm@gmail.com>, Silvio Peroni <silvio.peroni@unibo.it>
Cc: Scholarly HTML community group <public-scholarlyhtml@w3.org>
Message-ID: <d70bea4b-d672-4806-bae3-3970c8268a88@Spark>
(Although this issue is minor compared to a number of more general issues discussed in the thread, nevertheless…)

(For some reasons my original email did not end up in the community group mailing list, re-sending…)

On 9 Sep 2017, 23:14 +0200, Silvio Peroni <silvio.peroni@unibo.it>, wrote:
> Hi Johannes,
> </snip>

> > adding author information to the head and not the body
> And here is the rationale of the choice: the title, authors, keywords, are not really the “body” of an article – which should be the text which define the research described in it. They are just metadata of the article, and the place where usually we put metadata in HTML is within “head”.
> I’m not saying these choice are the true path. However, I think they are reasonable choice though.

HTML5 seems to have the right elements that express these things semantically: the <header>-<main>-<footer> elements. It strikes me as providing exactly the kind of separation  Silvio has in mind, but being (probably) much closer to the type of applications Johannes talks about, which relies on elements being in the <body>.


> Have a nice day :-)
> S.
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Silvio Peroni, Ph.D.
> Department of Computer Science and Engineering
> University of Bologna, Bologna (Italy)
> Tel: +39 051 2095393
> E-mail: silvio.peroni@unibo.it
> Web: https://www.unibo.it/sitoweb/silvio.peroni/en
> Twitter: essepuntato
Received on Sunday, 10 September 2017 07:42:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:13:01 UTC