JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for DC-GENERAL Archives


DC-GENERAL Archives

DC-GENERAL Archives


DC-GENERAL@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

DC-GENERAL Home

DC-GENERAL Home

DC-GENERAL  September 1996

DC-GENERAL September 1996

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: HTML metadata [was text/?]

From:

Jon Knight <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

dc-general

Date:

Fri, 6 Sep 1996 20:34:43 (BST)

Content-Type:

TEXT/PLAIN

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

TEXT/PLAIN (83 lines)

On Fri, 6 Sep 1996, Daniel LaLiberte wrote:
> Rendering for humans is not the main purpose but it is a significant
> side benefit.  The generality of the data structure is a much more
> important goal.  The META element only permits embedded values,
> whereas the LINK element only permits references to external data, and
> neither permits more complex grouping or nesting of structures.
> Furthermore, their use seems tailored to this arbitrary collection of
> "meta" data things with no clear definition of how to draw the
> boundary (and no clear boundary possible, in my opinion).

OK, so if we're talking about having a more general structure than META 
in HTML 2.0 provides for, what was wrong with the DCES SGML DTD?  Why do 
we need this in HTML at all if its _not_ specifically for rendering?  
HTML is after basically a rendering oriented SGML DTD.  What we're after 
here is structuring so why not just use a clean DTD without having to 
support all the bogosity of <CENTER> and <BLINK>?  And no need to worry 
about stepping on toes in W3C, etc.  We don't need most of HTML for this 
and we're having to bend bits of it to make it do what we want.

> Like you, I am assuming it *might* be external to the document.  If
> we want to embed this HTML data structure in an HTML document and
> hide it from casual view, then we probably need some other extension
> to HTML.  Simply putting it in the HEAD might work, but I think not for
> all browsers.  But I think there is much more value in permitting the
> metadata to be external to the document; it can be associated with the
> document via a LINK tag (you suggest META, but how?).

If we embed metadata in HTML documents in META elements where the HTML 
DTD > 3.2 (Wilbur), then we can push for META to have additional 
attributes to those that it current had and maybe even new elements that 
are valid in the HEAD.  

> I think it would be a mistake to put a META section in an HTML
> document intended as metadata for *another* document.  How would you
> specify the metadata of *that* document, such as who created it and
> when?  (Please don't go anti-recursive on me Stu.  This is a basic,
> relatively simple concept that most people won't have to deal with
> anyway.)

Good point.

I think we've got several things all going on at once here, and it might 
be worthwhile listing them to make sure that we're all talking about the 
same things.  As I see it we've got (ignoring Warwick Framework for a 
moment):

  1) Embedding the Dublin Core Element Set into HTML 2.0 using the META 
  element.  I think we reached consensus on this a few weeks back and its a 
  done deal.  It certainly seems OK to me (see the metadata in 
  <URL:http://www.roads.lut.ac.uk/> for example), and I know its being
  written up as we speak,

  2) Using a new SGML DTD to hold the Dublin Core Element Set.  This is
  what Lou, Liam, Eric et al came up with.  This can be linked to from
  other resources (such as HTML documents using LINK) and is pretty
  easy to parse as SGML goes.  I think that this is also pretty much a
  done deal; I certainly haven't seen much in the way of complaints on the 
  list about it and its been widely advertised (referenced from a Dlib
  article for example),

  3) Using HTML to hold some structured metadata (possibly including
  Dublin Core) using <DL>..</DL>.  This I still think is a bit odd.  If
  its just to be rendered, why does it need new elements/attributes?
  If its for machine parsing of DCES elements why not just use the 
  HTML 2.0 style META embedding as in 1) or a LINKed document conforming
  to the DTD in 2)?

So am I off the crease here?  What's missing from/wrong with  1) and 2) that 
means we need 3)?

Tatty bye,

Jim'll

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Jon "Jim'll" Knight, Researcher, Sysop and General Dogsbody, Dept. Computer
Studies, Loughborough University of Technology, Leics., ENGLAND.  LE11 3TU.
* I've found I now dream in Perl.  More worryingly, I enjoy those dreams. *




Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

February 2024
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
March 2020
February 2019
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
July 2001
June 2001
May 2001
April 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
June 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
October 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998
April 1998
March 1998
February 1998
January 1998
December 1997
November 1997
October 1997
September 1997
August 1997
July 1997
June 1997
May 1997
April 1997
March 1997
February 1997
January 1997
December 1996
November 1996
October 1996
September 1996
August 1996
July 1996
June 1996
May 1996
April 1996
March 1996


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager