I share Jon's view that trying to get <meta> upgraded to have content would be
a nonstarter.
I also think it seems to contradict one of my fundamental assumptions all
along. Which I will now state, just so as I can be reassured!
Implementing the Dublin core using the existing <meta> tag is a Quick Solution.
It is Not Perfect. It gives us a start.
In the long run, we will *always* want richer, more detailed, sets of metadata.
I happen to believe that the only practical way of supplying those sets is to
use SGML (or XML) as a syntax to define them, but that is not relevant to the
key point.
We should *not* try to shoehorn more into the limited solutions possible with
existing HTML tags. This means I regard with deep disquiet the baroque syntax
emanating from our friends in the north.
Lou
| Anybody fancy
|working on that (maybe off list for the moment so the element naming
|consensus doesn't get flooded out by SGML-heads arguing about DTDs :-) )?
Delighted to. And surely people on this list would benefit from a little
discussion of dtds?
|