skip to main page content CETIS: Click here to return to the homepage
the centre for educational technology interoperability standards

skip over the long navigation bar
Home
News
Features
Events
Forums
Reference
Briefings
Press centre

Inside Cetis
what is Cetis?
Contact us
Cetis staff
Jobs at CETIS


 




Syndication
XML: Click here to get the news as an RSS XML file XML: Click here to get the news as an Atom XML file iCAL: Click here to get the events as an iCalendar file

Background
what are learning technology standards?
who's involved?
who's doing what?

CETIS Groups
what are cetis groups?
what difference can they make?
Assessment SIG
Educational Content SIG
Enterprise SIG
Metadata SIG
Life Long Learning Group
Portfolio SIG
Accessibility Group
Pedagogy Forum
Developer's forum

Subjects
Accessibility (310)
Assessment (74)
Content (283)
Metadata (195)
Pedagogy (34)
Profile (138)
Tools (197)
For Developers (569)
For Educators (344)
For Managers (339)
For Members (584)
SCORM (118)
AICC (18)
CEN (34)
DCMI (36)
EML (47)
IEEE (79)
IMS (302)
ISO (21)
OAI (24)
OKI (20)
PROMETEUS (12)
W3C (37)

Re:Re:Re:Dynamic Display Model

Posted on May 10 2002 by Pierre Gorissen in reponse to Re:Re:Dynamic Display Model



...don't know were this reply is going to show up, but here goes...

I think we both are trying to do about the same.
From what I know from XHTML it is a step forward compared to HTML because it is much more strict structure wise and using CSS allows for much greater flexibility as far as layout goes.
In defense of HTML: you can do all that with HTML also.

Though Microsoft has a 90+ percent market share with IE, the thing that troubled me most when using CSS was the difference in browser support.

One thing (and please correct me if I'm wrong) you can't do with either HTML or XHTML is tell if there is a difference between <strong>This is a title</strong> and <h1>This is a title</h1>
The DTD for XHTML allows both because it doesn't handle the meaning while a DTD like DOCBOOK does. It only allows <title> to be used and has things like <sect1> and <sect2> for sections. A validating editor or parser only allows a <sect2> when it is nested inside a <sect1> etc. etc.

There is a discussion on the EC-SIG discussion list about levels of interoperability. I think you could do the same with re-usability.
Depending on how flexible it needs to be for you, you choose your best method.

Pierre

Replies to this post:

copyright cetis.ac.uk
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

syndication |publisher's statement |contact us |privacy policy

 go to start of page content