- From: Bullard, Claude L (Len) <clbullar@ingr.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Aug 2002 12:43:55 -0500
- To: "'Tim Bray'" <tbray@textuality.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
++1. Experience in the early and later CALS SGML systems strongly suggested that this is the best approach to lifecycle issues where one has to decide in advance how much to let lifecycle dominate over issues of local and time-limited interoperation issues. There are situations where one has to ask if the information is temporally limited, but the best overall rule is to achieve "semantic richness". len -----Original Message----- From: Tim Bray [mailto:tbray@textuality.com] I would however, support an assertion in the architecture document that important information SHOULD be stored and (optionally) delivered with markup that is as semantically rich as achievable, and that separation of semantic and presentational markup, to the extent possible, is architecturally sound. -Tim
Received on Friday, 16 August 2002 13:44:27 UTC