- From: Ian Jacobs <ij@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2000 22:59:32 -0400
- To: Al Gilman <asgilman@iamdigex.net>
- CC: w3c-wai-ua@w3.org
Al Gilman wrote: > > At 08:31 PM 2000-07-21 -0400, Ian Jacobs wrote: > > > > I would also note that this discussion sounds a little like the > > discussion about content meant for humans v. content meant for > > machines. Refer to Al's comments on this topic [7]: > > > > "The distinction between data (raw content) and meta-data > > (markup) is an artifact of the view assumed by the author. > > There is no fundamental semantic difference between what is > > called data vs. metadata. They both play the same role as > > bearers of information Semantically, it is all just > > one class of data. This is a little-understood fact of > > information science." > > > > Al, will you make the same comment about an assertion that > > presentation v. non-presentation (or structure)? > > > > [not promising to have read the rest of the message...] > > No. These concepts are well-posed enough, even if HTML elements don't sort > neatly along these lines. [snip] > So at least in HTML it is possible to talk about markup with > presentational semantics and markup with structural semantics, but it is > not possible to partition the set of element types into two groups which > are purely one and purely the other. Is that true for all elements (e.g., FONT) or just some? If possible for some elements, then I suggest we try to identify them. > Hope this is responsive to your question. Yes, thank you, - Ian -- Ian Jacobs (jacobs@w3.org) http://www.w3.org/People/Jacobs Tel: +1 831 457-2842 Cell: +1 917 450-8783
Received on Friday, 21 July 2000 22:59:42 UTC