- From: Lisa Seeman <lisa@ubaccess.com>
- Date: Thu, 26 Aug 2004 13:54:24 +0300
- To: 'WAI-IG' <w3c-wai-ig@w3.org>
If it helps, We use a single base markup language (extended XHTML) XSL and RDF for mapping relationships all with cocoon to chose XSL depending on the pipeline, pulling what I think is a darn good accessibility system for different user scenarios. Let me know if I can help further Lisa > -----Original Message----- > From: Patrick Lauke [mailto:P.H.Lauke@salford.ac.uk] > Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 2004 5:18 PM > To: WAI-IG > Subject: RE: Is W3C Technology Fragmented or Unified? > > > > From: Geoff Deering > [...] > > I know I have enough on my hands just trying to keep up > with basic W3C > > technologies. Whose the guru who has all this encapsulated in a > > vision > > *AND* really knows how to deploy all this in one CMS? > > I don't think it's realistic anymore to expect one single > guru to know all these things, but having separate groups of > developers within the organisation with good experience of > one of the technologies. You want a system at the core which > is modular, and can deliver the various markup solutions > based on a shared pool of resources (be it XML, an RDBM, web > service interfaces to complex - and legacy - enterprise systems, etc). > > I think somebody mentioned Cocoon. That's certainly one of > the ways I can see this moving towards. Again, you wouldn't > ask a single guru to develop your very own, in house version > of a Cocoon-like system plus all the various output modules. > You'd get a concerted effort to get a central framework in > place, but making sure that it can indeed be expanded in > future to output any standard formats - ideally rolling them > out one by one (saying from the start that you need > xhtml,xml,svg,rdf,atom,kitchensinkML,etc > is not a realistic proposition, and the decision-makers need > to be made aware that this is the case). > > However, I don't think that the opposite trend - having a > single monolithic super markup language that does everything > (and includes the complete DTD of > kitchensinkML) is a viable alternative either. I do see the > need for separate languages for separate purposes. It's true, > however, that we need to be careful not to get lost in the > see of similar-but-not-quite ones (RSS vs Atom, and all their > separate versions) > > Just thinking out loud. Not really an answer to your > question, I know... > > Patrick > ________________________________ > Patrick H. Lauke > Webmaster / University of Salford > http://www.salford.ac.uk >
Received on Thursday, 26 August 2004 10:53:56 UTC