- From: Silvio Peroni <silvio.peroni@unibo.it>
- Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2017 11:20:50 +0200
- To: Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca>
- CC: <public-scholarlyhtml@w3.org>
Hi Sarven, Thanks for sharing. Just two distinct and different views, that's all. As I already said, I'm open to discuss and consider any alternative - and more founded, if you prefer - approach for handling these things in SH-CG. Really, my only goal now is to reach an agreement, and I think that several people here - thanks to their past experiences - can provide wonderful constructive inputs. I totally agree with Ivan - I would suggest to stop the rather philosophical discussions about what is better, and just focussing to have a concrete base of articles available in those existing formats to discuss how we can reach a plausible agreement of what and how should be specified in SH-CG. I'll look for an article in the CS that can be used for that. Looking forward to having the inputs from others about the other Disciplines. Have a nice day :-) S. > Il giorno 10 set 2017, alle ore 10:54, Sarven Capadisli <info@csarven.ca> ha scritto: > >> On 2017-09-09 23:13, Silvio Peroni wrote: >> 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. > > I would argue that most well-established publishing practices on the Web > wouldn't agree with that approach. What you consider as "metadata" is > very much human-visible "data" (in source) in the wild. > > For visible data, anywhere from content publishing platforms, eg > Wordpress, to long trail of accessibility practices, to independent > communities, eg microformats, encouraging it. > > So, I don't think they are reasonable, and probably counter intuitive to > using HTML to begin with. Throwing what you consider to be "metadata" > under the carpet is only really of interest to specific > tooling/frameworks. It depends on JavaScript as well as RDF libraries to > make it useful to a human reader. > > See also https://dokie.li/docs#human-machine-readable > > -Sarven > http://csarven.ca/#i >
Received on Sunday, 10 September 2017 09:21:18 UTC