Lists Home |
Date Index |
Costello, Roger L. said:
> 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.
> 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.
Hum, situation is still poor than that (for 'XMLers').
GIF, JPEG... is prefered over XMLs as SVG.
CSS is prefered over XSLT.
HLINKs prefered over XLinks
TeX/LaTeX prefered over MathML.
Specific formats for scientific disciplines are prefered. For instance,
specific chemical formats and files over CML.
HTML prefered over XHTML.
Specific formats for other usages are also prefered. FOr example, MP3 over
some XML language for music: e.g. MusicXML.
PDF is prefered over XML formats like XSL-FO and similar.
In short, like some guys claimed XML is a big fiasco or "a train to
nowhere". Of course, it is being used behind the scenes by big-medium size
companies, but XML was not designed and or proposed for that. XML was SGML
for the web, the visible one.
Take the case of MathML, publicited as math for the web. Well, several
publishers are using MathML in their internal workflows, but serving PDF
or images to end users.
It is not difficult to see then that a standard is not really needed
behind the scenes. The standard is really needed for _communication_ (and
no publishers interchanges really information with rival publishers).
> 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
Even i see possible that people using XML for the web return to a HTML
approach, specially after the interest of browser developers in future
HTML5. There is gurus on the web who proved XHTML during some time and
returned to HTML by one or other motive. Some thoughts can be useful for
Also i see some misinformation to users. Some people want use SVG and then
think that only way to use SVG is translating the whole web site to XHTML.
Well, some 'gurus' are using SVG embebeded into 'old' HTML (no XHTML)
pages. I was perplexed first time i discover that!
> ASSERTION #3
> On the visible Web, (X)HTML will continue to be the primary markup
> language for the foreseeable future.
HTML, probably yes, XHTML i do not know. I suspect that a part of XHTML
community jump to next XHTML 2, whereas others jump to HTML5. Others will
prefer to develop proper XML language.
> 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.
Completely agree! or in another way, follow real life not w3c
grandilocuent proclamations. A good rule today (working in my case) is to
follow the contrary way to w3c proclamations: XHTML 2 is the future (than
may be not), XSTL is the language for transformations (then e4x may
infinitely better), XSL-FO is better than CSS (just use CSS), do not
develop your own language, use our ones (then begin to develop your own
language). The MathML WG is developing an input syntax (then develop your
own) This works very well for me and for some people i know, of course,
sometimes the rule fails.
> I gratefully acknowledge the outstanding comments from the following
> 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).
Center for CANONICAL |SCIENCE)