On 2014-10-07 15:44, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
Well, I remain totally unconvinced that any current HTML solution is as
good as the current PDF setup. Certainly htlatex is not suitable.
There may be some way to get tex4ht to do better, but no one has
provided a solution. Sarven Capadisli
Done.
The goal of a new paper-preparation and display system should, however, be to
be better than what is currently available. Most HTML-based solutions do not
exploit the benefits of HTML, strangely enough.
Consider, for example, citation links. They generally jump you to the
references
On 2014-10-08 14:10, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
Done.
The goal of a new paper-preparation and display system should, however,
be to be better than what is currently available. Most HTML-based
solutions do not exploit the benefits of HTML, strangely enough.
Consider, for example, citation
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
PLOS is an interesting case. The HTML for PLOS articles is relatively
readable. However, the HTML that the PLOS setup produces is failing at math,
even for articles from August 2014.
As well, sometimes when I zoom in or out (so that I
On 10/08/2014 05:31 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
PLOS is an interesting case. The HTML for PLOS articles is relatively
readable. However, the HTML that the PLOS setup produces is failing at math,
even for articles from August 2014.
As
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
The goal of a new paper-preparation and display system should, however, be to
be better than what is currently available. Most HTML-based solutions do not
exploit the benefits of HTML, strangely enough.
Consider, for example, citation
Dear Sarven,
I really appreciate the work that you're doing with trying to style an
HTML page to look similar to the Latex templates. But there's so many
typesetting details that are not available in browsers, which means
you're going to do a lot of DOM hacking to be able to produce the same
I'm always at a bit of a loss when I read this sort of thing. Kerning,
seriously? We can't share scientific content in HTML because of kerning?
In practice, web browsers do a perfectly reasonable job of text layout,
in real time, and do it in a way that allows easy reflowing. The
thing about
Hi Sarven,
Congratulations for kicking off a thread that has received over 150 replies
across two W3 lists in a week. That is impressive! This isn't the first time
(nor the last) that it has been discussed. The active discussion reaffirms the
need to drive a closer dialog between Web
On 2014-10-08 15:14, Luca Matteis wrote:
Dear Sarven,
I really appreciate the work that you're doing with trying to style an
HTML page to look similar to the Latex templates. But there's so many
typesetting details that are not available in browsers, which means
you're going to do a lot of DOM
On 10/8/14 10:18 AM, Sarven Capadisli wrote:
On 2014-10-08 15:14, Luca Matteis wrote:
Dear Sarven,
I really appreciate the work that you're doing with trying to style an
HTML page to look similar to the Latex templates. But there's so many
typesetting details that are not available in
On Oct 8, 2014 10:15 AM, Gray, Alasdair a.j.g.g...@hw.ac.uk wrote:
Or is that because they want to import it into their own reference
management system, e.g. Mendeley, which does not support the HTML version?
1. It is quite easy to embedded metadata in HTML pages in forms designed
for accurate
On 2014-10-08 18:38, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
Sarven,
Linked Open Data dogfooding, re., issue tracking i.e., a 5-Star Linked
Open Data URI that identifies Github issue tracker for Linked Data Research:
[1]
On 10/8/14 3:13 PM, Sarven Capadisli wrote:
On 2014-10-08 18:38, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
Sarven,
Linked Open Data dogfooding, re., issue tracking i.e., a 5-Star Linked
Open Data URI that identifies Github issue tracker for Linked Data
Research:
[1]
* Luca Matteis lmatt...@gmail.com [2014-10-07 00:41+0200]
Sorry to jump into this once again but when it comes to typesetting
nothing really comes close to Latex/PDF:
http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/120271/alternatives-to-latex -
not even HTML/CSS/JavaScript
Making a floating model
+1
This is precisely one of the main ideas we pursued in Wf4Ever. The paper
in whatever format is not enough, you also need to preserve the methods
and their implementation, including the workflows and the datasets, not
only for validation and reproducibility purpose in the face of
Kingsley and all, hello.
On 2014 Oct 7, at 02:18, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
On 10/6/14 2:49 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
On 10/06/2014 11:03 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 10/6/14 12:48 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
It's not hard to query PDFs with
Eric, hello.
This is a bit of a side-issue, but...
On 2014 Oct 7, at 07:13, Eric Prud'hommeaux e...@w3.org wrote:
* Luca Matteis lmatt...@gmail.com [2014-10-07 00:41+0200]
Sorry to jump into this once again but when it comes to typesetting
nothing really comes close to Latex/PDF:
On 10/7/14 5:39 AM, Norman Gray wrote:
Kingsley and all, hello.
On 2014 Oct 7, at 02:18, Kingsley Idehen kide...@openlinksw.com wrote:
On 10/6/14 2:49 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
On 10/06/2014 11:03 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 10/6/14 12:48 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
The stack exchange discussion mostly talks about the user side of
things. Go back (quite) a few years and using PDF from tex was a pain,
pretty much up until pdflatex become the norm.
For those who thing that latex is still the best, I do not see that an
HTML centric publishing framework
Norman Gray nor...@astro.gla.ac.uk writes:
This won't dynamically reflow, it's true (and that's a pity), but if I ever
get a tablet computer, I doubt I'll be able to resist producing versions in a
layout which is targeted at that size of screen.
Sure, that's fine. But why not have a version
On 2014-10-07 11:39, Norman Gray wrote:
The original spark to the thread was a lament that SW and LD conferences don't
mandate something XMLish for submissions because X(HT)ML is clearly better
for... well ... dammit, it's Better.
Straw man argument. Please stop that now!
I will spell out
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
tex4ht takes the slight strange approach of having an strange and
incomprehensible command line, and then lots of scripts which do default
options, of which xhmlatex is one. In my installation, they've only put
the basic ones into the
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
On 10/06/2014 11:00 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
On 10/06/2014 09:32 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
Who cares what the authors intend?
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
So, you believe that there is an excellent set of tools for preparing,
reviewing, and reading scientific publishing.
Package them up and make them widely available. If they are good, people will
use them.
Convince those who run
What I'd suggest for conference organisers is something like the following:
1. Keep the PDF as the main thing, as it's not going anywhere soon.
3. Also allow submission in some alternative form, including semantic
content, and have the conference run a competition for alternative
publishing
If you mean that published papers have to be in PDF, but that they can
optionally have a second format, then I had no problem with this proposal. I
also have no problem with encouraging use of other formats.
However, this is an added burden on conference organizers. Someone would have
to
On 10/07/2014 05:27 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
So, you believe that there is an excellent set of tools for preparing,
reviewing, and reading scientific publishing.
Package them up and make them widely available. If they are good, people
On 10/07/2014 05:23 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
On 10/06/2014 11:00 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
On 10/06/2014 09:32 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider
On 10/07/2014 05:20 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
tex4ht takes the slight strange approach of having an strange and
incomprehensible command line, and then lots of scripts which do default
options, of which xhmlatex is one. In my
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
tex4ht takes the slight strange approach of having an strange and
incomprehensible command line, and then lots of scripts which do default
options, of which xhmlatex is one. In my installation, they've only put
the basic ones into the
Hi John, Kingsley, et al,
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 8:39 AM, John Erickson olyerick...@gmail.com wrote:
This is an incredibly rich and interestingly conversation. I think there
are two separate themes:
1. What is required and/or asked-for by the conference organizers...
a. ...that is needed for
Sure, I have lots of papers (none for ESWC, though) that could serve as test
cases.
peter
On 10/07/2014 07:49 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
tex4ht takes the slight strange approach of having an strange and
incomprehensible command line, and
BLUF: This is where information science comes in. Technology must meet the
needs of real users.
It may be better to generate better Tagged PDFs, and to experiment, using
some existing methodology annotation ontologies, with generating auxiliary
files of triples. This might require new/changed
On 10/7/14 1:14 PM, Norman Gray wrote:
Sarven, hello.
On 2014 Oct 7, at 13:13, Sarven Capadisli i...@csarven.ca wrote:
On 2014-10-07 11:39, Norman Gray wrote:
The original spark to the thread was a lament that SW and LD conferences don't
mandate something XMLish for submissions because
PLOS is an interesting case. The HTML for PLOS articles is relatively
readable. However, the HTML that the PLOS setup produces is failing at math,
even for articles from August 2014.
As well, sometimes when I zoom in or out (so that I can see the math better)
Firefox stops displaying the
On 2014-10-06 06:59, Ivan Herman wrote:
Of course, I could expect a Web technology related crows to use HTML
source editing directly but the experience by Daniel and myself with the
World Wide Web conference(!) is that people do not want to do that.
(Researchers in, say, Web Search have
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
One problem with allowing HTML submission is ensuring that reviewers can
correctly view the submission as the authors intended it to be viewed. How
would you feel if your paper was rejected because one of the reviewers could
not view
Luca Matteis lmatt...@gmail.com writes:
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Ivan Herman i...@w3.org wrote:
The real problem is still the missing tooling. Authors, even if technically
savy like this community, want to do what they set up to do: write their
papers as quickly as possible. They do
Sarven Capadisli i...@csarven.ca writes:
I will bet that if the requirements evolve towards Webby submissions, within
3-5 years time, we'd see a notable change in how we collect, document and mine
scientific research in SW. This is not just being hopeful. I believe that if
all of the
On 10/6/14 7:43 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
I don't believe that HTML is a good authoring format any more than PDF
is. I don't think see this as huge problem. HTML needs to be part of the
tool-chain, not all of it.
+1
--
Regards,
Kingsley Idehen
Founder CEO
OpenLink Software
Company Web:
Hello,
My apologies if this is a repost (errors were encountered and my last post
bounced from the listserv)...
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Luca Matteis lmatt...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Ivan Herman i...@w3.org wrote:
The real problem is still the missing tooling.
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 2:39 PM, Mark Diggory mdigg...@atmire.com wrote:
Hello Community,
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Luca Matteis lmatt...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Ivan Herman i...@w3.org wrote:
The real problem is still the missing tooling. Authors, even if
Hello Community,
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Luca Matteis lmatt...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Ivan Herman i...@w3.org wrote:
The real problem is still the missing tooling. Authors, even if
technically savy like this community, want to do what they set up to do:
Frankly I don't see the reason for the hate on PDF files.
I do a lot of reading on a tablet these days because I can take it to the
gym or on a walk or in the car. Network reliability is not universal when
I leave the house (even if I had a $10 a GB LTE plan) so downloaded PDFs
are my document
On 10/06/2014 04:15 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
One problem with allowing HTML submission is ensuring that reviewers can
correctly view the submission as the authors intended it to be viewed. How
would you feel if your paper was rejected
On 10/06/2014 04:27 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
[On using htlatex for conferences.]
So, as well as providing a LNCS stylesheet, we'd need a htlatex cf.cfg,
and one CSS and it's done. Be good to have another CSS for on-screen
viewing; LNCS's back of a postage stamp is very poor for that.
Phil
I
On 10/6/14 10:25 AM, Paul Houle wrote:
Frankly I don't see the reason for the hate on PDF files.
I do a lot of reading on a tablet these days because I can take it to
the gym or on a walk or in the car. Network reliability is not
universal when I leave the house (even if I had a $10 a GB LTE
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
However, my point was not about looking good. It was about being able to see
the paper in the way that the author intended.
Yes, I understand this. It's not something that I consider at all
important, which perhaps represents our
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Phillip Lord
phillip.l...@newcastle.ac.uk wrote:
Who cares what the authors intend? I mean, they are not reading the
paper, are they?
Authors might have adjusted things that way specifically to deliver
their message. I think being able to have consistent layouts
This is an incredibly rich and interestingly conversation. I think there
are two separate themes:
1. What is required and/or asked-for by the conference organizers...
a. ...that is needed for the review process
b. ...that is needed to implement value-added services for the conference
c. ...that
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
I would be totally astonished if using htlatex as the main way to produce
conference papers were as simple as this.
I just tried htlatex on my ISWC paper, and the result was, to put it mildly,
horrible. (One of my AAAI papers was about
On 10/06/2014 08:38 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
I would be totally astonished if using htlatex as the main way to produce
conference papers were as simple as this.
I just tried htlatex on my ISWC paper, and the result was, to put it mildly,
On 10/06/2014 08:29 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
However, my point was not about looking good. It was about being able to see
the paper in the way that the author intended.
Yes, I understand this. It's not something that I consider at all
Dear Peter,
please show me how to query PDFs with SPARQL. Then I'll believe there
are no benefits of XHTML+RDFa over PDF.
Addressing the issue from the reviewer perspective only is too narrow,
don't you think?
Martynas
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 6:08 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
It does MathML I think, which is then rendered client side. Or you could
drop math-mode straight through and render client side with mathjax.
Well, somehow png files are being produced for some math, which is a failure.
Yeah, you have to
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
Who cares what the authors intend? I mean, they are not reading the
paper, are they?
For reviewing, what the authors intend is extremely important. Having
different rendering of the paper interfere with the authors' message is
It's not hard to query PDFs with SPARQL. All you have to do is extract the
metadata from the document and turn it into RDF, if needed. Lots of programs
extract and display this metadata already.
No, I don't think that viewing this issue from the reviewer perspective is too
narrow.
On 10/06/2014 09:28 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
It does MathML I think, which is then rendered client side. Or you could
drop math-mode straight through and render client side with mathjax.
Well, somehow png files are being produced for some
Following the same logic, we still could have been using paper
submissions? All you have to do is to scan them to turn them into
PDFs.
It's been a while since I was in the university, but wasn't
dissemination an important part of science? What about dogfooding
after all?
Martynas
On Mon, Oct
On 10/06/2014 09:32 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
Who cares what the authors intend? I mean, they are not reading the
paper, are they?
For reviewing, what the authors intend is extremely important. Having
different rendering of the paper
I would be much more generic here,
show me how to query a bunch of PDFs with anything... of course, the answer
will go like you can extract the text and do A and the B and then get a
relatively decent text depending on A B and C. then someone else will
chime in and say and this is just because
It's not hard to query PDFs with SPARQL. All you have to do is extract
the metadata from the document and turn it into RDF, if needed. Lots of
programs extract and display this metadata already.
in the age of the web of data why should I restrict my search just to
metadata? I want the full
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
On 10/06/2014 09:28 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
It does MathML I think, which is then rendered client side. Or you could
drop math-mode straight through and render client side with
I don't think that scanning a printout retains any metadata that was in the
electronic source so, no, this would not follow using the same logic.
I do agree that dissemination of results is one of the most important parts of
the scientific process. The argument here is, I think, what is the
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
On 10/06/2014 09:32 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
Who cares what the authors intend? I mean, they are not reading the
paper, are they?
For reviewing, what the authors intend is
Sure. So extract the text from the PDF and query that. It also would be nice
to have access to the LaTeX sources.
What HTML publishing *might* have that is better than the above is to more
easily embed some extra information into papers that can be queried. Is this
just metadata that could
On 10/6/14 12:48 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
It's not hard to query PDFs with SPARQL. All you have to do is
extract the metadata from the document and turn it into RDF, if
needed. Lots of programs extract and display this metadata already.
Peter,
Having had 200+ (some-non-rdf-doc}
On 10/06/2014 10:44 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
On 10/06/2014 09:28 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
It does MathML I think, which is then rendered client side. Or you could
drop math-mode
On 10/06/2014 11:00 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
On 10/06/2014 09:32 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
Who cares what the authors intend? I mean, they are not reading the
paper, are they?
For
On 10/06/2014 11:00 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
On 10/06/2014 09:32 AM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Peter F. Patel-Schneider pfpschnei...@gmail.com writes:
Who cares what the authors intend? I mean, they are not reading the
paper, are they?
For
On 10/06/2014 11:03 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 10/6/14 12:48 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
It's not hard to query PDFs with SPARQL. All you have to do is extract the
metadata from the document and turn it into RDF, if needed. Lots of programs
extract and display this metadata
Luca Matteis lmatt...@gmail.com writes:
On Mon, Oct 6, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Phillip Lord wrote:
Who cares what the authors intend? I mean, they are not reading the
paper, are they?
Authors might have adjusted things that way specifically to deliver
their message. I think being able to
On 10/6/14 2:19 PM, Alexander Garcia Castro wrote:
querying PDFs is NOT simple and requires a lot of work -and usually
produces lots of errors.
Yes, I believe I indicated that in my response to Peter i.e., it isn't
simple or productive.
just querying metadata is not enough.
Yes, I said
Greetings.
On 2014 Oct 6, at 19:19, Alexander Garcia Castro alexgarc...@gmail.com wrote:
querying PDFs is NOT simple and requires a lot of work -and usually
produces lots of errors. just querying metadata is not enough. As I said
before, I understand the PDF as something that gives me a
Sorry to jump into this once again but when it comes to typesetting
nothing really comes close to Latex/PDF:
http://tex.stackexchange.com/questions/120271/alternatives-to-latex -
not even HTML/CSS/JavaScript
On Tue, Oct 7, 2014 at 12:18 AM, Norman Gray nor...@astro.gla.ac.uk wrote:
Greetings.
Neat. This could be extended to putting a full table of contents into the
metadata, and in lots of other ways. The other nice thing about it is that it
would be possible to push the same data through a LaTeX to HTML toolchain for
those who want HTML output.
peter
On 10/06/2014 03:18 PM,
On 10/6/14 2:49 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
On 10/06/2014 11:03 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 10/6/14 12:48 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
It's not hard to query PDFs with SPARQL. All you have to do is
extract the
metadata from the document and turn it into RDF, if needed. Lots
Hi Adobe lurkers,
Kingsley has just handed you a valuable means to keep users tied to your
technologies:
On 10/6/2014 8:18 PM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 10/6/14 2:49 PM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
On 10/06/2014 11:03 AM, Kingsley Idehen wrote:
On 10/6/14 12:48 PM, Peter F.
Hello Paul,
On Sat, Oct 04, 2014 at 06:47:19PM -0500, Paul Tyson wrote:
I certainly was not suggesting this. It would indeed be silly to publish
large collections of empirical quantitative propositions in RDF.
Yes. And describing such collections with RDF on a level above basic metadata
is
On 5 Oct 2014, at 11:07, Michael Brunnbauer bru...@netestate.de wrote:
...
Basic metadata is good. Publishing datasets with the paper is good. Having
typed links in the paper is good. But I would not demand to go further.
+1
++1 - the dataset publishing can include the workflow, tools etc,
...@3roundstones.com
Sent: Saturday, October 4, 2014 12:14 PM
Subject: Re: scientific publishing process (was Re: Cost and access)
Executive summary:
1) Bring up an ePrints repository for “our” conferences, and a myExperiment
instance, or equivalents;
2) Start to contribute to the Open Source
This is not a direct answer to Daniel, but rather expanding on what he said.
Actually, he and I were (and still are) in the same IW3C2 committee, ie, we
share the experience; and I was one of those (although the credit really goes
to Bob Hopgood, actually, who was pushing that the most) who
I think I mentioned previously, Ivan, but perhaps not on this thread -
Hugh McGuire has developed a Wordpress tool called PressBooks which allows
you to write a book in HTML and export it as an EPUB file. He even
supports schema.org markup in a separate plugin.
(http://www.pressbooks.com)
On
metadata, sure. it is a must. BUT good and thought for the web of data. not
designed for paper based collections. From my experience it is not so much
about representing everything from the paper as triplets. there will be
statements that won't be representable, also, such approach may not be
+1
John
http://Bresl.in
On 5 Oct 2014, at 15:39, Ivan Herman i...@w3.org wrote:
This is not a direct answer to Daniel, but rather expanding on what he said.
Actually, he and I were (and still are) in the same IW3C2 committee, ie, we
share the experience; and I was one of those (although
On 05 Oct 2014, at 16:47 , Laura Dawson laura.daw...@bowker.com wrote:
I think I mentioned previously, Ivan, but perhaps not on this thread -
Hugh McGuire has developed a Wordpress tool called PressBooks which allows
you to write a book in HTML and export it as an EPUB file. He even
supports
]
Sent: 03 October 2014 21:15
To: Diogo FC Patrao
Cc: Phillip Lord; semantic-...@w3.org mailto:semantic-...@w3.org;
public-lod@w3.org mailto:public-lod@w3.org
Subject: Re: scientific publishing process (was Re: Cost and access)
On 10/03/2014 10:25 AM, Diogo FC Patrao
Hi Alexander,
On 5 Oct 2014, at 15:57, Alexander Garcia Castro alexgarc...@gmail.com
wrote:
metadata, sure. it is a must. BUT good and thought for the web of data. not
designed for paper based collections. From my experience it is not so much
about representing everything from the paper
Hi Ivan,
On 5 Oct 2014, at 16:42, Ivan Herman i...@w3.org wrote:
On 05 Oct 2014, at 16:47 , Laura Dawson laura.daw...@bowker.com wrote:
I think I mentioned previously, Ivan, but perhaps not on this thread -
Hugh McGuire has developed a Wordpress tool called PressBooks which allows
you
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Ivan Herman i...@w3.org wrote:
The real problem is still the missing tooling. Authors, even if technically
savy like this community, want to do what they set up to do: write their
papers as quickly as possible. They do not want to spend their time going
On 10/5/14 6:19 AM, Hugh Glaser wrote:
On 5 Oct 2014, at 11:07, Michael Brunnbauerbru...@netestate.de wrote:
...
Basic metadata is good. Publishing datasets with the paper is good. Having
typed links in the paper is good. But I would not demand to go further.
+1
++1 - the dataset
On 10/5/14 9:55 AM, Dominic Oldman wrote:
Further to Hugh's comment about the non-techhy world I found this
interesting quote on the Web.
The web is more a social creation than a technical one. I designed it
for a social effect — to help people work together — and not as a
technical toy. The
Word adds all sorts of horrible tags to things and makes the HTML
virtually unrender-able.
On 10/5/14, 4:19 PM, Luca Matteis lmatt...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Ivan Herman i...@w3.org wrote:
The real problem is still the missing tooling. Authors, even if
technically savy
On 05 Oct 2014, at 22:19 , Luca Matteis lmatt...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 5, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Ivan Herman i...@w3.org wrote:
The real problem is still the missing tooling. Authors, even if technically
savy like this community, want to do what they set up to do: write their
papers as
On 2014-10-04 04:14, Daniel Schwabe wrote:
As is often the case on the Internet, this discussion gives me a terrible sense
of dejá vu. We've had this discussion many times before.
Some years back the IW3C2 (the steering committee for the WWW conference
series, of which I am part) first tried
Hello Paul,
On Fri, Oct 03, 2014 at 04:05:07PM -0500, Paul Tyson wrote:
Yes. We are setting the bar too low. The field of knowledge computing
will only reach maturity when authors can publish their theses in such a
manner that one can programmatically extract the concepts, propositions,
and
Executive summary:
1) Bring up an ePrints repository for “our” conferences, and a myExperiment
instance, or equivalents;
2) Start to contribute to the Open Source community.
Please, please, let’s not build anything ourselves - if we are to do anything,
then let’s choose and join suitable
PDFs are surprisingly flexible and open containers for transporting around
Stuff
hi, i'm feeling tempted to add something provocative ;-)
PDFs are surprisingly mature in disguising all the 'bla bla' and make it
look nice...
= http://tractatus-online.appspot.com/Tractatus/jonathan/index.html
On 10/4/14 7:14 AM, Hugh Glaser wrote:
Executive summary:
1) Bring up an ePrints repository for “our” conferences, and a myExperiment
instance, or equivalents;
2) Start to contribute to the Open Source community.
Please, please, let’s not build anything ourselves - if we are to do anything,
1 - 100 of 119 matches
Mail list logo
