Whoops... I think we're getting a bit carried away with the cutting and
pasting... I do not know what the "official" W3 position is on
embedding META in HTML. The proposed convention that came out of the
meeting was
<META NAME = "schema_identifier.element_name" CONTENT = "string data">
perhaps this is what Nick was referring to? The W3 was not (to my
knowledge) endorsing or leveraging the Dublin Core as *the* resource
description model for the web...
> They can intend anything they want: They have to convince John Q.
> Webauthor to actually *use* it correctly. And it isn't going to happen. I
This, again, is debatable, however as a staunch SGML supporter and
a current HTML harvester, it's embarrassing the degree of compliance
that we're looking at... As for the HTML_WG processes. There are enough
scars on my back from the early IETF working group to agree with you.
> with a screaming baby - who is *still* holding onto your face. The HTML-WG
> (and the Dublin code) both are trying/tried force in their approaches to
> standard setting. Rather than going with the flow and riding the part of
Wow! We (the editorial 'we') have discussed the Dublin Core in several
contexts, but to my knowledge, we've never tried "force" in any of our
talks... I wonder if that works...:)
> Benjamin "will write metaphors for free" Franz
eric "who wonders if Benjamin has any overdue books :)" miller
eric j. miller <URL:http://purl.oclc.org/net/eric>
emiller@oclc.org Office of Research, OCLC, Inc.
emiller@cis.ohio-state.edu Dept. of Geography, The Ohio State University