RE: How to describe Flowcharts, Schematics, etc

An interesting set of ideas are the ones Geoffrey Fox presented at the XML
Implementers' Conference
<http://www.npac.syr.edu/users/gcf/montrealxmlaug99/>.  He sees some of the
same requirements for an articulable ontology arising out of
telecollaboration as we want for accessibility.

Al

At 11:48 PM 8/29/99 -0400, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
>
>What we are trying to do is create the "science" that can provide as much
>support as possible to the "art".
>
>I have taken an example from SVG - scalable vector graphics. For people who
>are interested in seeing the effect there are several open-source renderers
>available already - see http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG for more information.
>
>What I have done is to use metadata to describe the fact that two of the
>objects in the image are connectors, and say what they connect.
>
>The hope is that it is possible to use a metadata reader to generate the
>description of the image, by finding descriptions of the different things
>which are connected, and being able to say "a typical desktop PC
(ComputerA)  
>is connected by a twisted-pair cable (CableA) to another object (hub)".
>
>The idea is that there are objects identified by names (CableA), (ComputerA),
>(hub) with descriptive text (in the case of ComputerA and CableA) in the SVG
>source. There is metadata - stuff that machines can read, which says that the
>thing called CableA is a connection between ComputerA and hub, just as there
>is metadata that an RDF-aware search engine can use to discover that there
>are three creators of this document.
>
>The example is at http://www.w3.org/1999/08/29-network.svg
>
>Charles McCN
>
>On Fri, 27 Aug 1999, Bruce Bailey wrote:
>
>  David, et al.,
>  
>  Audio description is art as much as science. 
>[and some more]
>

Received on Friday, 3 September 1999 16:07:29 UTC