 |
 |
I think that people want to look at metadata, yes, but I do not think that looking at it in raw tagged form is the thing we should be worried about. Reading HTML text in raw form is painful enough... we don't do it (don't need to, except perhaps for editting purposes). Same will be true of metadata. We'll have tools. The fact that these tools are not now commonplace does not mean we should work at making the tags readable, but rather we should work at providing the tools (which will be pretty straightforward). stu On Saturday, September 13, 1997 4:30 PM, Simon Pockley [SMTP:[log in to unmask]] wrote: > I guess most of us have become avid readers of other people's metadata. I have. > This raises the question about whether we should keep in mind that these tags > should be designed to be human readable as well as machine readable. I have > been moving quite a lot of information off the display side of the screen into > the metadata in the belief that humans will be reading it as well as machines. > > Do you think this is wrong thinking ? > > Following the discussion about dates (earlier in the year), I have been > sticking to my belief that a date is unambiguously human readable in the form > 14th September 1997 rather than 19970914 which I don't think is a human > friendly form. > > Regards to you all and hoping for a reply... > > > Simon Pockley