[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
Underpinning this whole discussion is the premise that XML is a specific
markup language, while XML itself asserts that it is
..."a subset of SGML... [the goal of which is] to enable generic SGML to
be served, received, and processed on the Web in the way that is now
possible with HTML." Which assertion contradicts the premise, to wit,
that XML is generic markup.
One can say an XML based language "is XML", and that's saying something
useful but I find it too weak a distinction when asking this question.
Does "XML" mean just generic markup which represents the markup used by
a company/person/institution for its processes, but not governed by a
formal document other than XML 1.x? Does "XML" mean SVG, XForms, XSL-FO,
XUL, or some other markup meant to provide a visual impact - other than
XHTML? Does "XML" mean DocBook, DITA, UBL, or other tagging used for the
authoring, production, and transactional processes? IMHO, your assertion
depends not just on how you define "visible Web", but upon what you
consider to be "XML".
People in the wild mostly use a version of IE that only understands
HTML, not XHTML, which it only supports to the extent that it pretends
to be HTML. I would think that "XHTML" as used to describe information
on the visible Web should be counted as XML, not HTML, if it is XML
compliant. But it depends on what you consider "XML".
Costello, Roger L. wrote:
> Hi Folks,
> Once again, many thanks for your outstanding comments. Below I have
> tried to recap the core assertions. I am sure that many of the
> assertions could be worded better or more precisely. Please let me
> know. And as always, I welcome your critique of the assertions. /Roger
> **
> *ASSERTION #1*
>
> *There is little usage of XML on the visible Web. That is, the
> information available to the end user (or his/her browser) is
> primarily in the form of (X)HTML, not XML.*
>
> *
>
> *ASSERTION #2*
>
> *XML is not appropriate for the visible Web. XML will continue to have
> limited usage on the visible Web. As Len Bullard says, “**XML is
> plumbing**”. *
>
> *ASSERTION #3*
>
> *On the visible Web, (X)HTML will continue to be the primary markup
> language for the foreseeable future.*
>
> *
>
> ASSERTION #4
>
> *The more a resource makes available its information (in an
> appropriate way) on the visible Web, the more useful and beneficial it
> becomes to the Web community.** *
>
> *ASSERTION #5*
>
> *Web services are part of the hidden Web, and are useful and
> beneficial to the Web community only to the extent they are able to
> contribute or facilitate the availability of information in an
> appropriate fashion to the visible Web. *
>
> *ASSERTION #6*
>
> *Focus your main efforts on making information available on the
> visible Web in an appropriate fashion such that the benefits of doing
> so are maximized, and without introducing a detrimental impact.*
>
> *
> ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
> I gratefully acknowledge the outstanding comments from the following
> people:
> Bryan Rasmussen
> Chris Gray
> Colin Muller
> Dave Pawson
> David Lyon
> Derek Denny-Brown
> Didier PH Martin
> Doug Rudder
> Elliotte Rusty Harold
> Greg Alvord
> Jim Fuller
> Juan Gonzalez
> Len Bullard
> Michael Kay
> Mukul Gandhi
> Richard Salz
> Sterling Stouden
> Tei Oscar Vives
> **
> *DEFINITION - VISIBLE WEB*
>
> The visible Web is the portion of the Web that produces information
> intended for human consumption. In particular, this document focuses
> on the portion of the Web that produces information to be consumed by
> humans via a browser. The visible Web is the portion of the Web that
> produces information that is available to search engines.
>
> *DEFINITION – HIDDEN (INVISIBLE) WEB*
>
> The hidden Web, on the other hand, is the portion of the Web that
> produces the information intended to be consumed by machines (/i.e.,
> /machine-to-machine interaction).
>
> *
|
