Re: Multi-channel content

On Tue, Feb 17, 2004 at 05:37:30PM -0000, Rotan Hanrahan wrote:
> A well designed document should be accessible by anyone on any device.
> Where this falls apart is in assuming that XHTML in its current
> incarnation is sufficient to represent a document that can be
> accessible by anyone on any device.

You believe the XHTML spec is too weak ? Perhaps I don't have high
expectations of a "document".

> The DIWG has explored the challenges, deficiencies, requirements and
> current techniques relating to this issue. I urge you to read this
> material. Perhaps, eventually (with some guidance from our Group and
> related Groups) we will achieve a document representation and

I have poked around, but I have not found anything besides the "fails to
meet the content providers needs with respect to end-users"
argumentation. Are these the same content providers that gave us Flash,
cluttered table layouts, walled gardens, poor accessibility and other
such nonsense?

> adaptation strategy/mechanism that will achieve the goal of "write
> once, read anywhere". I personally doubt this will happen any time
> soon, and I encourage you to research the gap between what we have
> today (e.g. XHTML, CSSMQ, XForms, SMIL) and what we (probably) need in
> the future.

What is CSSMQ? I am quite familiar with XHTML, CSS, XForms, and if we
can just encourage good implementations of those, I think we can reach
tangible goals.

> I hasten to point out that describing CC/PP as a "waste of time" is
> hardly a good way to engage with a group of highly dedicated people
> from around the world who have expended so much effort in creating
> CC/PP...

I am sorry about that. It was a Freudian slip. I just think its a step
backwards. It is like setting a standard, for non-standardness. I have
very little faith in content adaption.

Kind regards,

Received on Wednesday, 18 February 2004 10:07:37 UTC