- From: Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr>
- Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 16:52:27 +0200
- To: www-style@w3.org
- CC: www-tag@w3.org
Svgdeveloper@aol.com wrote: > What is the "meaning" of a headline (sic)? Put it this way: is there any reason you put what you put in your email subjects instead of, say, your sig? Would you buy a newspaper that printed out in bold letters on its front page the text of any random paragraph instead of something that allows you to know in a nutshell what the content is? > Is there, for example, a worthwhile semantic difference between the > following? > > <h1>"Formatting Objects Considered Harmful"</h1> > <p>Often repeated</p> > <p>Poorly argued</p> > > and > > <p>""Formatting Objects Considered Harmful"</p> > <ul> > <li>Often repeated</li> > <li>Poorly argued</li> > </ul> > > and > > <svg:text>"Formatting Objects Considered Harmful"</svg:text> > <svg:tspan>Often repeated</svg:tspan> > <svg:tspan>Poorly argued</svg:tspan> > </svg:text> Well yes, I think it's fairly obvious... If I want to extract headlines from a document in order to generate a summary or a ToC, I'll be able to do it with the first one but not with the two others. Similarly a list-collasper will only work on the second one. The semantic difference is strong and worthwhile to the point of being necessary. > To a human reader the meaning is pretty clear but to pretend that the > HTML variants shown (and there are many others) contain some sort of > immutable semantics is, I suggest, illusory. I'm not sure what you mean by "immutable". I agree that "headline" probably meant something different (if anything at all) in ancient Greece... Apart from that I don't think anyone needs a crash course in ontology to know the difference between a paragraph and a headline. If you really believe what you're saying, why do you use anything other than span and div? > Are you seriously suggesting that SVG too is "harmful" and should be > abandoned because it lacks the historical domain-specific idiosyncracies > of HTML? I don't know what Håkon is suggesting and won't answer in his stead but I don't think that SVG is harmful. The fact that it is presentation-orientated doesn't make much of a difference. In fact it does have what could be construed as domain-specific idiosyncracies given that it has some semantics, however shallow (a rectangle is a rectangle is a rectangle no matter what Illustrator thinks). Besides your example above is somewhat flawed. The "G" in SVG stands for "Graphics", not for "Text". Besides, imho the best practice for SVG is to use it to render semantic content graphically as has been done to a limited extent with "taglibs". I don't know enough about XFO to argument a strong case, but I will not consider it harmful *if* people use it by sending semantic content which is rendered in an XFO renderer after some transformation. If all that's sent is the XFO output, then yes I think it is harmful. -- Robin Berjon <robin.berjon@expway.fr> Research Engineer, Expway
Received on Friday, 16 August 2002 10:53:06 UTC