How?

Seth Russell: "The W3C has already recommended RDF, I don't understand what 
additional signal you're waiting for."

WL: The above was in answer to my previously posted "When?" query. More 
than a "signal" I'm waiting for a usable-by-layperson means of including 
RDF "stuff" in an XHTML file that will enable me to proclaim my assertions: 
that I have in good faith made the instant file conformant to some level of 
the WCAG; that the file is *about* something. Hopefully the inclusion of 
these items will help some future "Web-miner" looking for whatever I've 
said the site is about (and that it is accessible).

I believe that the possibility of *ever* finding a way to index sites by 
other-than-word-search methods is vain so the inclusion of "what" material 
by the author will probably be the best hope for usable indexing - even 
though it necessarily involves a "Web of Trust". I think Tim's "The concept 
of machine-understandable documents does not imply some magical artificial 
intelligence which allows machines to comprehend human mumblings. It only 
indicates a machine's ability to solve a well-defined problem by performing 
well-defined operations on existing well-defined data. Instead of asking 
machines to understand people's language, it involves asking people to make 
the extra effort" calls for authors to perform that "extra effort" and that 
if there were some *simple* way to make "what" assertions [summaries, 
whatever], people would begin doing it.

So in reply to Seth's question, I'm waiting for the ability to insert stuff 
in my XHTML files that will be usable by RDF software. I understand that 
this is in turn awaiting the modularization of XHTML.

As Rodney King asked "why can't we all just get along?" and Charlie Parker 
said "Now Is the Time" - anybody have any ideas on how I can further my 
herein stated goals?

--
Love.
                 ACCESSIBILITY IS RIGHT - NOT PRIVILEGE

Received on Wednesday, 22 November 2000 10:27:54 UTC