Thanks Sarven, Trying to make sure I understand: So you are saying that conferences should say that it will accept (only?) HTML. And so the process for paper production for me is to save/export from Microsoft Word as HTML, instead of doing a "print" to PDF, which is what I usually do? Or do you have some other HTML production system in mind?
I hate PDF with a passion, by the way, but in the socio thingy of being an editor of a proceedings, it can be an enormous pain when people submit HTML that has local links to images, etc., even from MS Word documents. Cheers On 24 Apr 2013, at 18:23, Sarven Capadisli <[email protected]> wrote: > On 04/24/2013 05:37 PM, Andrea Splendiani wrote: >> There two main issues in moving beyond pdf. >> >> One, probably minor, is that there are larger constraints. Some >> people need their work to be somewhere "understood" by their >> organization. This is a bit less relevant for conferences than for >> journals, but still an issue. >> >> The other is that some bit of a research paper can lend to >> formalization. But there is a lot of variability. In some case you >> are closer to what web languages can represent. E.g.: a finding in >> RDF, some algorithm shown in JavaScript,... But what is somebody is >> publishing a description of an information systems ? It may get so >> far from a standard way to talk about think that you won't gain much >> with a structured representation. >> >> pdf + other technologies, when it applies, could be a good idea, >> though. > > I can't quite make out the core of the issues that you are trying to > describe. So, from I understand: > > We could maybe at least give this HTML thing a try. And, later worry about > semantic alignments? > > IMHO, there is no compelling reason to research and try PDF + other > technologies, when we have HTML+RDF + other technologies already in place and > staring right at us. > > -Sarven >
