- From: Nick Arnett <narnett@verity.com>
- Date: Fri, 22 Nov 1996 13:04:58 -0800
- To: www-html@w3.org
- Cc: www-html@w3.org
At 03:39 PM 11/22/96 -0500, Sunil Mishra wrote: >No, HTML is not geared towards a hieararchical document definition, which >is essentially what you seem to be looking for. The closest you might be >able to get is to specify each article within it's own ><div>. Unfortunately, the ID attribute has disappeared from HTML 3.2, which >is exactly what you would be looking for if you wanted to specify a >specific subpart of the HTML. The agent would of course also have to be >modified to react to changes within specific <div>'s rather than a change >anywhere within the document. A poor alternative to id would be to ><a name...> the headline at the top of the <div>. > >HTML 3.2 does specifies a class attribute. I would generally consider it a >very bad hack to use class to specify different stories. But then you would >not be the first to hack up HTML. We'd much prefer to work within the standard. Our engine can treat a byte range as a retrieval unit, which parsing the text between the DIV tags could produce. But I'm wondering what publishers and users would expect as default behavior -- would they *expect* each clump of HTML in a DIV section to be a search and retrieval unit? Is the primary purpose of DIV to define sub-documents within pages? Or would we be trying to change the purpose of DIV if we promoted this as a solution to the agent problem? Nick Arnett --------------------------------------- Evangelist Product Manager, Advanced Technology Verity Inc. 408-542-2164; home office 408-369-1233 http://www.verity.com
Received on Friday, 22 November 1996 15:59:16 UTC