Re: [sdw] Create a list of OGC standards that are "not yet Web-friendly enough" plus rationale for each

re: "Webby": The architecture of the Web demands that a URL be embedded in a hypertext medium a.k.a. a link. As far as WMS, WFS and WMTS go, we have defined a format (MapML) which is that medium, to the extent possible without demanding changes to those services.  This is consistent with [Web design principles](https://www.w3.org/DesignIssues/Principles.html).  Web architecture was designed for browsers, incidentally.  This is also an area where the conversation about REST has completely failed us, to the point where it's actively harmful to understanding to mention it. Consider it not mentioned here.

We hope to get MapML onto the development roadmap for browsers, not only by thinking about it and contributing, but equally importantly by coming together around the specification as our community's offering to the Web at large.  

> when do you think we can schedule this as an OGC Architecture Board topic? 

Having the OGC AB ponder this question might be good.  In the meantime, consider this an invitation to [join the Maps for HTML Community Group](https://www.w3.org/community/maps4html/) as a way of representing this coming together.  Also, please contribute / check us out!

Footnotes:

I often hear people say that XML is not Web-friendly, so why would you define another *ML?  The answer is another question, which is: **"Who is the (developer) you are trying to reach with the format?"**  For us the answer is: **the same people who HTML is designed to reach**, i.e. people who make web pages, who range in skill from absolute beginners, such as children learning about the Web, to the highly-skilled and knowledgeable developers who define and maintain browser engines, and everyone in between.  Also, not unimportantly, for Web crawlers, which benefit from declarative formats by not having to execute programs to understand the content.

Now some of the cruft that comes along with XML, especially namespaces, we don't need and neither do the people we're trying to reach, so [we didn't use them](https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/microxml/raw-file/tip/spec/microxml.html).  That is one step in the direction of simplicity.  Further, we are trying to not re-invent a whole vocabulary, but to seamlessly extend the HTML vocabulary, in a way that minimally fits the [requirements](http://maps4html.github.io/HTML-Map-Element-UseCases-Requirements/).  That is another design decision in the direction of simplicity, but it is a tightrope. 



-- 
GitHub Notification of comment by prushforth
Please view or discuss this issue at https://github.com/w3c/sdw/issues/1057#issuecomment-411434056 using your GitHub account

Received on Wednesday, 8 August 2018 14:51:43 UTC