- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 14:42:49 -0500
- To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>, <w3c-wai-er-ig@w3.org>, "Leonard R. Kasday" <kasday@acm.org>
At 05:58 PM 2000-12-11 +0000, Sean B. Palmer wrote: >> Is there any part of w3c space you haven't >> perused <grin/>? > >"If there is, I don't wanna know about it" :-) > >> We want to give this rapid scan capability to users who are >> blind. Hence, it would be useful for the browser to enable >> the user to choose any class and then step through elements >> of that class. > >That's a very good idea. I always thought we needed more forms and >definitions of "class". We can use it for style, transformations, and >sectioning, and that's a lot for one attribute to handle. It's potentially >the most semantic attribute in XHTML, and yet it can also be used to infer >presentation...highly irregular! >I like the idea of binding classes to ID's, as per Dan Connolly's HyperRDF: ><http://www.w3.org/2000/07/hs78>http://www.w3.org/2000/07/hs78 which extends the class mechanism, but a lot >of browsers don't allow for escaped characters in CSS:- > > .rel\:class { color: #000000; } > >Which is very frustrating. > >> and the opinion that all XHTML is presentation, and that true >> content would be XML >> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2000OctDec/0757.html>http:// lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-wai-gl/2000OctDec/0757.html > >True content would be RDF/XML. I created an example for a fake meeting where >all of the meeting details are stored in RDF [1] and transformed [2] on the >fly to produce an XHTML [3] output. The short decription is at ><http://infomesh.net/swdemo/#demo>http://infomesh.net/swdemo/#demo I urge you to take a look! > [1] <http://infomesh.net/swdemo/demo/rdfmeeting.xml>http://infomesh.net/swdemo/d emo/rdfmeeting.xml > [2] <http://infomesh.net/swdemo/demo/meetingtoxhtml.xsl>http://infomesh.net/swde mo/demo/meetingtoxhtml.xsl > [3] <http://infomesh.net/swdemo/demo/meeting.asp>http://infomesh.net/swdemo/demo /meeting.asp >The XSLT files are a bit scrappy for now, but they work! > >> what I'm suggesting here is that when authors use classes >> (e.g. stainless-steel) to add semantics to web pages, let's >> create a way so that people with disabilities get the equivalent >> benefits. > >Any form of semantic equals a benefit to disabled users, because they don't >miss out on anything :-) That's the whole point of Semantics, everything is >raw information, and then from that you can convert it into the medium of >your preference. I could write a stylesheet to transform that meeting >example of mine into content for Aural Browsers, flashy IE5 types, WAP, or >whatever! > >> The simplest way is to squeeze it into CSS, but that >> runs counter to the philosophy that CSS has only "presentation". >> RDF is another way, and Sean has corrected my initial amateur >> attempts to do that. We could also do an XML schema. > >Why would we be writing an XML Schema? Unless you mean we could write an XML >Schema for XHTML ("don't even go there!"), Schemas are the third layer: 1) >Data, 2) Metadata, 3) Schemes for metadata (i.e. metadata about metadata). >Like A.S. says, we are struggling with how best to attack data, and only a >handful are working on metadata. Schemas are way ahead of us! I challenge >you to find some RDF that has a non 1 dimensional structure as dictated by a >Schema. It isn't even possible yet... >Schemas are great, but only in the right places! > >> Having said all that, if we want to continue this, the question is >> what list to put it on? > >Your choice. As the original document was an ERT production, I thought it >best to direct my comments here. It might move to PF... > AG:: Somehow we need to a) address the general W3C language architecture through PF while still b) working the specfic case of capturing evaluations in ER. Note: There are some architectural ideas expressed above, such as the idea that semantics does not include presentation, that metadata can be semantically distinguished from data in the absense of a schema, etc. that bear further investigation. Ideally the way to conduct such examination is in the light of more concrete access-related scenarios (situations and the functions you need in those situation). Related point: With regard to a metadata module, Sean, have you reviewed the SMIL 2 metadata module? Is that module something we could use in EDL? It would seem to be the "RDF in XHTML modularization" precedent that is furthest down the Recommendation track. Al >Kindest Regards, >Sean B. Palmer ><http://www.mysterylights.com/sbp/>http://www.mysterylights.com/sbp/ >"Perhaps, but let's not get bogged down in semantics." > - Homer J. Simpson, BABF07. >
Received on Monday, 11 December 2000 14:05:18 UTC