Re: ICADD elements in HTMLjsuttor@passage.com (Jeff Suttor)
Date: Fri, 9 Sep 94 20:32:15 EDT
From: email@example.com (Jeff Suttor)
To: Multiple recipients of list <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: ICADD elements in HTML
X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas
X-Comment: HTML Working Group (Private)
Terry Allen writes ...
> There seems to be consensus that adding the elements is the way
> to go; so I say we might as well put them into 2.0 as wait for
I disagree that the way to go is to add new elements.
The power of the SDA->ICADD model is that it allows *any* DTD to use
SDA attributes to make *any* SGML instance available to the ICADD
application for print impaired use.
Insuring that HTML 2.0 has a 1 <-> 1 mapping/usage provides a false
sense, IMHO, of 'solving' or addressing accessibility. If you're
going to be an ICADD application, you're going to use SDA by
definition. In the long run, 1-2 yrs net time :), this will buy alot
of instant accessiblity but not do anything real for use/adoption of
SDA/ICADD in the long term.
I'm old to enough to remember life before HTML and expect that the
specifics of HTML will someday be something that we all look back on
as history. An SDA/ICADD application on the other hand will have a
life span == SGML.
We use SDA/ICADD on all on-line campus wide information at UCLA.
Nothing is released without SDA/ICADD support. It is more up front
work, but it appears to pay off in the long term.