- From: Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis <bhawkeslewis@googlemail.com>
- Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 07:44:01 +0000
- To: David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk>
- Cc: www-html <www-html@w3.org>
On Sun, Jan 16, 2011 at 11:00 AM, David Woolley <forums@david-woolley.me.uk> wrote: > Ian Hickson wrote: > >> >> Why? That is, what software are you hoping will act on this, and what are >> you hoping it will do with it? >> > > Although my feeling was that "down" was too generic, I think that saying the > relation should not be there reflects the loss of the declarative nature of > HTML. Disagree. Declarative languages attempt to effect software behavior, just like imperative languages do. That's trivially true of programming languages, but it's also true of markup languages. For example, from the TEI introduction: "These Guidelines … make recommendations about suitable ways of representing those features of textual resources which need to be identified explicitly in order to facilitate processing by computer programs. In particular, they specify a set of markers (or tags) which may be inserted in the electronic representation of the text, in order to mark the text structure and other features of interest. Many, or most, computer programs depend on the presence of such explicit markers for their functionality, since without them a digitized text appears to be nothing but a sequence of undifferentiated bits." http://www.tei-c.org/release/doc/tei-p5-doc/en/html/AB.html > HTML markup shouldn't just be there to instruct the browser, but also to > provide information on the author's intent. Browsers are only one type of "software". I can't think of any other feature that has ever been added to HTML without a view that some generic class of software might make use of that declaration of intent. Can you? -- Benjamin Hawkes-Lewis
Received on Monday, 17 January 2011 07:44:34 UTC