2 ms·

no <div class="abstract-container"> <div class="abstract"> <pre><code> abstract text ... </code></pre> </div> <div class="author-list"> <ol> <li>author o

no <div class="abstract-container"> <div class="abstract"> <pre><code> abstract text ... </code></pre> </div> <div class="author-list"> <ol> <li>author one</li> <li>author two</li> <ol> </div> should be just: [abstract] abstract text [authors] author one | email | affiliation author two | email | affiliation

afavour 10mo ago
Sounds like XML and XSL would be a great fit here. Shame it’s being deprecated. But you could still use HTML. Elements with a dash in are reserved for custom elements (that is, a new standardised element will never take that name) so you could do: <paper-author-list> <paper-author /> </paper-author-list> And it would be valid HTML. Then you’d style it with CSS, with paper-author { display: list-item; } And so on.
- bawolff 10mo ago
  Nothing is stopping you from using server side XSL. I personally dont think its a great fit, but people need to stop acting like xsl has been wiped from the face of the earth.
  - afavour 10mo ago
    Yes but we’re specifically talking about a display format here. Something requiring a server side transform before being viewable by a user is a clear step backwards.
    - bawolff 10mo ago
      How so? I can't think of any advantage to having client side xsl over outputting two files, in this context.
      - afavour 10mo ago
        The discussion is about the form in which you share papers. With HTML you just share the HTML file, it opens instantly on basically any device. If you distribute the paper as XML with an XSLT transform you need to run something that’ll perform that transform before you can read the paper. No matter whether that transform happens on the server or on the client it’s still an extra complication in the flow of sharing information.
- xworld21 10mo ago
  Indeed, LaTeXML (the software used by arXiv) converts LaTeX to a semantic XML document which is turned to HTML using primarily XSLT!
panzi 10mo ago
There is <article> <section> <figure> <legend>, but yes, <abstract> and <authors> is missing as such. But there are meta tags for such things. Then there is RDF and Thing. Not quite the same, I know, but it's not completely useless.
- kevindamm 10mo ago
  and you could shim these gaps with custom components, hypothetically

afavour 10mo ago

Sounds like XML and XSL would be a great fit here. Shame it’s being deprecated. But you could still use HTML. Elements with a dash in are reserved for custom elements (that is, a new standardised element will never take that name) so you could do: <paper-author-list> <paper-author /> </paper-author-list> And it would be valid HTML. Then you’d style it with CSS, with paper-author { display: list-item; } And so on.

bawolff 10mo ago
Nothing is stopping you from using server side XSL. I personally dont think its a great fit, but people need to stop acting like xsl has been wiped from the face of the earth.
- afavour 10mo ago
  Yes but we’re specifically talking about a display format here. Something requiring a server side transform before being viewable by a user is a clear step backwards.
  - bawolff 10mo ago
    How so? I can't think of any advantage to having client side xsl over outputting two files, in this context.
    - afavour 10mo ago
      The discussion is about the form in which you share papers. With HTML you just share the HTML file, it opens instantly on basically any device. If you distribute the paper as XML with an XSLT transform you need to run something that’ll perform that transform before you can read the paper. No matter whether that transform happens on the server or on the client it’s still an extra complication in the flow of sharing information.
xworld21 10mo ago
Indeed, LaTeXML (the software used by arXiv) converts LaTeX to a semantic XML document which is turned to HTML using primarily XSLT!

panzi 10mo ago

There is <article> <section> <figure> <legend>, but yes, <abstract> and <authors> is missing as such. But there are meta tags for such things. Then there is RDF and Thing. Not quite the same, I know, but it's not completely useless.

kevindamm 10mo ago
and you could shim these gaps with custom components, hypothetically