Lists Home |
Date Index |
On Mon, 2006-07-24 at 18:09 +0200, Jirka Kosek wrote:
> You might consider HTML (without font and other elements) as a semantic
> and non-presentational language. But if you compare HTML with more
> semantic oriented formats for documents like DocBook or TEI, you will
> consider HTML as being very presentational oriented. It depends on where
> you draw border line and what level of semantic you expect from your
> There is nothing wrong on serving SVG or MathML content to users as long
> as you are interested in displaying of information only. If you want
> "full access" to information for your users, you can always provide
> alternative content in a more semantically rich format. But there should
> be set of common formats, which is widely supported and understood.
Which ties in with a couple of earlier threads Jirka?
David C wants his mathml to play with in a math engine.
A Lynx user may have better uses for semantic XML
instead of HTML.
Roger asks about an either or situation, perhaps an answer is
to offer choices? Here's the docbook with embedded mathml,
and here's the readily comprehensible html, perhaps with microformat
additions. SVG can render the mathml (to some extent), but for a math
engine, or more generally for further XML processing, it will only
annoy the recipient if the supplier omits the source XML, be it
a visible or invisible web?
XSLT + Docbook FAQ