[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: human-readable?
Greetings, Rather than nip-n-tuck Steve Pepper's reply to my post on metadata, I wanted to start a new thread on the subject of human-readable. (I will be replying to other issues in that thread.) In a nutshell, I put metadata in the header of an HTML document and said that was "human-readable." Steve Pepper on the other hand took the position: > No. The metadata about the subject indicator (in particular, the > publisher and the date) is not human-readable, in my opinion. > Techie-readable maybe (using View Source), but not human-readable Is there a general sense of the group that "human-readable" = displayed to the user? I don't have a problem with that being the case but I assumed "human-readable" would include anything that could be read by a human, in the same sense that XML is "human-readable" well, sorta. Taking "human-readable" at its most literal sense. Comments? Hope everyone is having a great day! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau Director of Research and Development Society of Biblical Literature Patrick.Durusau@sbl-site.org Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]