- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2001 23:09:49 -0400
- To: Harald Tveit Alvestrand <harald@alvestrand.no>, Eastlake III Donald-LDE008 <Donald.Eastlake@motorola.com>, "'Rob Lanphier'" <robla@real.com>
- Cc: uri@w3.org, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>, Dan Zigmond <djz@corp.webtv.net>, Rich Petke <rpetke@wcom.net>
At 05:03 PM 2001-09-25 , Harald Tveit Alvestrand wrote: >Don, >it would be quite useful if your draft would explain better WHY you need a >mapping between these two quite dissimilar name spaces. > >I have trouble imagining the case where you would want to use it. > AG:: Let me give you one example. In the XML Accessibility Guidelines, we ask novel dialects not only to derive their structure and properties as specializations of widely used forebears, but also to give analogies where possible to the most-similar well-known media types and/or their properties. <http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlgl#g4_0>http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlgl#g4_0 How can approximate analogies be useful? Some assistive technologies, such as screen readers, take a document designed for one interface and reconstruct another, derived interface for the user to interact with. This is not done without a certain amount of heuristic decision making, because the document designer usually didn't design for the super-ultimate translation that the screen reader lays on the content. In a processing context such as that, rough similes could be of benefit in selecting what heuristics to apply. Knowing that an application is something like application/ms-excel could give a leg up on the problem. And the dominant population of well-known document kinds to draw analogies to would probably be the Internet Media Type family. So having URI spellings with which to refer to them in similarity assertions enriching a schema could be handy. Al > Harald > >--On 25. september 2001 16:41 -0400 Eastlake III Donald-LDE008 ><Donald.Eastlake@motorola.com> wrote: > >> Thanks for the endorsement. I've been a bit remise in working on my >> draft recently. I plan to make one more very minor pass over it, post an >> updated version, and then request IESG action as a Proposed Standard. But >> I'm certainly open to receiving comments now and, if the IESG chooses to >> proceed, there will be an opportunity for the community to comment during >> the Last Call. >
Received on Tuesday, 25 September 2001 23:05:30 UTC