- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@access.digex.net>
- Date: Fri, 19 Sep 1997 14:21:01 -0400 (EDT)
- To: w3c-wai-hc@w3.org (HC team)
to follow up on what Jason White said: > 2. I would like clarification of the proposal to reserve link > types for accessibility-related resources. If the plan is to > establish a key word which, if present, declares that the > linked resource is intended for purposes of accessibility (for > example an audio version of a document; perhaps in talking book > format) then I think the approach is meritorious. However, > certain types of resource that we have been discussing are not > exclusively related to accessibility. For example, an > abbreviation dictionary is important to speech output, but it > may also be used by a spelling checker, or as a mechanism by > which a link can be associated with each abbreviation, which, > if activated, displays its expansion (this might be desirable > in some educational settings, though the spelling checker > illustration is a more commonplace application). Thus, care > should be taken in deciding which link types should be > associated with an "accessibility" key-word. As Daniel has > suggested, CLASS may be a better location for the declaration > of the type of dictionary (rel="dictionary" > class="abbreviation"). The situation for dictionaries is a lot like the situation for stylesheets. For the dictionary itself, universally across all applications of that dictionary, one wants to summarize the capabilities offered by that dictionary. This is a special case of describing the functional class of a relation. A dictionary is a relation in that it associates text strings, the spellings of terms, with other characteristics of those terms such as part of speech, pronunciation, typical examples of use, idioms that use this term, etc. To summarize or characterize a dictionary, one wants to communicate the following information items: domain of discourse where these terms are used: -- language and optionally professional discipline caracteristics enumerated in the dictionary: -- functional classes such as graph (spelling) part of speech date of earliest know use etymology pronunciation definition usage examples etc. encodings of characteristics language : ISO xxx extended per ... graph : charset as per HTTP pronunciation : code, e.g. IPA This characterization constitutes the "pre-sale disclosure" information that a potential user of this resource would want to have before deciding to "buy" i.e. invest FTP or HTTP effort to get that resource. The author of an HTML document may want to do two things: 1: emphasize that a remote resource such as a dictionary is potentially value added to the processing of the current document. This is the kind of information that I think the LINK is for. The reference to the dictionary would do well to characterize the capabilities of the dictionary [in the reference] if the remote dictionary resource will be competing with local resources and perhaps other remote resources for net bandwidth and local compute cycles in the user's browse session. Or else the characterization is obtained by some lightweight form of metadata query such as RDF (PICS) or the HTTP HEAD request. 2: steer the application of alternative resources when there is more than one resource with applicable capabilities. That is why one may wish to class a term <SPAN CLASS=JARGON DOMAIN=IEEE/MTT>millimeter-wave</SPAN> as a technical term and therby force interpretation of that term through a specialist dictionary if the current document is a technical document that wishes to use jargon terms in their technical senses. What the HTML author does in this case is to narrow the domain of application of the available dictionaries by giving preference rules to resolve application overlaps. This can be done as a decision rule with dictionary selection as an output, or it can be done by projecting the capability type of a remote resource down to a sub-relation which is the slice that the current document wants to apply. This creates a virtual resource which is a projection or slice of the remote as-archived resource. Items in the document, whether text-level or block-level, can be bound to specific dictionaries by referencing the ID of a LINK element or an URL for the dictionary. They can also be associated functionally by being associated with CLASS values and the dictionary selection controlled as a function of CLASS. Or by an explicit reference in the other direction from a dictionary LINK to a TARGET=id . Let me strengthen my statement about dictionaries and stylesheets. At the level of abstraction discussed just above, the theory of relation classes and types fits both dictionaries and stylesheets in the same way. A stylesheet is a relation. The User Interface is a collection of resources. The stylesheet binds content classes to realizations which require those resources. The MEDIA indication for a stylesheet is an attempt to describe the general type of resources which that stylesheet requires, as part of advertising the capability offered by the stylesheet. -- Al
Received on Friday, 19 September 1997 14:21:04 UTC