- From: Al Gilman <asgilman@access.digex.net>
- Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 11:41:00 -0400 (EDT)
- To: w3c-wai-wg@w3.org (WAI Working Group)
From: "T. V. Raman" <raman@adobe.com> I agree with Daniel on his reactions to Murray's suggestions about IPP and BPP. I also have a general comment about the direction I see Murray's message leading, namely, tag-mania all over again. On the whole, I agree with the trend established by Daniel and seconded by T.V. The place where I fall off the track laid down by T.V. has to do with making references to print versions in the accepted indexing medium of the print realm. [picking up the quote from T.V.] Daniel-- so you have some background about IPP and BPP: The ICADD 22 was designed to help in the production of etexts and braille texts --these were necessarily looking at documents that had already been published. This is why tags representing post-processing information such as IPP and BPP made their way into that DTD. As you point out, these do not have a place except in the printing spec, and I'd redirect this to that working group. [Al, here...] This is where my agreement breaks down. Specifically, "these do not have a place except in the printing spec" goes too far. The Braille user with an ICADD 22 document can get an answer to the question "Where am I in the print-version coordinates?" That question should be answerable by some mechanism we support. It is not just a matter of instructing the printing device. This is required for coordination [over the phone] by people using print and Braille variants of the same document. The same goes for print and Web versions of the same document. Braille users are not the only users needing cross-index or coordinate tranformation services. Compare this with the issue of the West Publishing copyright on the pagination that is required as the means of indexing in court proceedings in the U.S. -- Al Gilman
Received on Tuesday, 20 May 1997 11:41:01 UTC