W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > September 2001

Re: Something Different

From: Mark Brownell <gizmotron@earthlink.net>
Date: Mon, 3 Sep 2001 00:15:48 -0400
Message-ID: <001601c1342f$1e3ce8a0$3a34103f@oemcomputer>
To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
> Hi there,
> > Oh boy! I knew this was going to be fun.
> You may well be right...

<snip type="[...]"/>

> So these projects aren't unique. None of them appear to be being
> implemented regularly by people other than the authors of the mechanisms
> themselves (correct me if I'm wrong). I'm more looking forward to XHTML
> 2.0, which should have state-of-the-art metadata facilities, but that's
> going to take a long time before it gets to recommendation. I'm working on
> a couple of generic XML content languages myself (one co-developed with
> Aaron Swartz) which also allow for scoped metadata that can be easily
> transformed into RDF.


I've been looking at allot of these. I was most impressed by the stuff I 
found at Dublin Core on the subject of RDF. This is because, like the 
examples that you present above, I'm interested in my own idea and 
solutions that fit well with it.

> [...]
> > What I mean is simple XML elements, (no attributes, namespaces),
> > that are natural language in their use.
> I doubt the benefits of marking up text with arbitrary elements that are
> undefined in any way. Might be fun to play around with, but I don't think
> it has any serious value. What wold you *do* with it?

Now that is a big question. You know that part of the MTML explained document 
that says, "Have you ever gone to the index of a book, and found several possible 
references to what you were looking for?" Well this is exactly what this markup 
enables the sub-browser to work with. I designed my own unique parser that is 
based on parallel numerical values that allow a single or the accumulation of several 
documents to be quarried through the use of these arbitrary elements. The elements 
in the sub-browser are readable from a selectable list of search items. Conditional 
and/or inclusion mechanisms help to give the sub-browser a better selectivity 
process while querying the documents. 

I also gave this markup enhancement a way to isolate multiple root levels from a single, 
or multiple set of documents. In this regard there is not a well formed consideration for 
XML parsers in wide use today. I did this so that each root level could be treated as an 
individual object.

As far as the significance of these arbitrary elements are concerned, I have made it 
possible for each HTML document the ability to declare their existence as a search 
item. In a multiple document download these search items could be inclusive throughout 
all the documents that are downloaded. So a search item in one document would act on 
the same arbitrary element in another, while retaining its original URL location as the link 
back to the full HTML source. 

This is where a RDF plan comes into play. The RDF portal information contains the 
arbitrary elemental value of each root level type for each of the documents referenced 
in the RDF as well as the arbitrary elements found within each root type. So a RDF portal 
supplies human readable arbitrary elements as potential choices for selectivity. So a 
document containing multiple RDF portals could be a searchable resource for information 
gathering. I envision a database solution that serves up arbitrary elements that best fit the 
information that I'm seeking. If these arbitrary elements exist in a RDF portal object then 
that single RDF portal object is added to the document returned from the database.

So the real problem is arbitrary elements becoming acceptable members of any single 
groups construct library. This is where the human brain becomes part of the decision 
making process. When does an arbitrary element become an official element? Does it 
become normalized from the bottom up based on the needs of the group, or from the top 
down so as to conform with the meaning of human/machine interface mechanisms?

> [...]
> > I guess that if my experiment is considered far out then I would
> > at least want it to have the correct RDF Dublin Core that will be
> > in the main stream.
> At the moment there is no such thing as "correct". You have a choice
> between "pedantic", "unimplemented", "unimplementable", "wacky", and
> "wrong" :-)

I knew that! 

I'm going to work on getting it right. I know that the idea of adding semantic tools inside 
of HTML documents is different. My goal here is to make it possible to find semantic 
information on the internet through a RDF system, and then to utilize the power of 
information gathering from a group of documents declared in that RDF portal with the 
relational text gathering system in the MTML/ sub-browser combination. Soon I'll be 
adding a memory to the sub-browser website that will save individual objects based 
on the demands of the user. 
> You're not back at base yet... :-)
> [...]
> > Now for the fun stuff. The enhancement to the HTML, that I mentioned, is
> > something I call Meaningful Text Markup Language. It is a natural
> > language way of adding handles to the text found in HTML pages, [...]
> I've been through it. Perhaps you'd be interested in the HumanMarkup [1]
> stuff, which seems just about as daft an idea as this (for some level of
> "daft" which the reader can qualify).

I'll definitely check that one out soon. Thanks.

> I like this bit in the MTML tutorial that starts:-
>    "Have you ever gone to the index of a book, and found several
>    possible references to what you were looking for?"
> That's a neat little thing, if it works. However, the "natural language"
> aspect of MTML and the lack of specifications makes me wonder if a version
> drafted properly in XML etc. might be more beneficial.

MTML was created to allow three basic markup requirements, inside a HTML document, 
in order to make the entire markup language functional. This is learnable in about five 
minutes. One: declare the author defined arbitrary elements as search items. Two: declare 
any additional URLs that are associated with this document. Three: declare the tags used 
for the multiple root level objects. Four: use the arbitrary elements. 

Actually I see a wonderful use for XML here. It can be used to create HTML documents 
that have correctly placed MTML tags, and declarations. I plan to create middleware 
applications that deal with this in the future. 

Received on Monday, 3 September 2001 00:18:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:32 UTC