Cary has invited comments about the availability of and access to material on
the Internet and particularly the use of the e-mail archive and Web pages.
While it is a good aim to make information available via a number of methods, I
do not believe it is feasible or indeed desirable for all Web pages to be
available in an e-mail version.
In terms of access, I suspect that most users can make direct use of Web
pages,
either through a browser like Netscape/Mosaic or Lynx or an offline reader.
There will clearly be a number of users without these facilities who might
benefit from being able to download the text of the Web page as an e-mail
document, but I do not think this should be a priority or a design constraint,
other than in the specific case mentioned below.
The present pages in the ICOM e-mail archive include examples of straight text
and pages with HTML markup. I have originated the Web copy for one or two of
the
latter examples (like the Internet brochure) and they do not transfer very
successfully as an e-mail document, due to the incorporation of HTML mark-up,
inappropriate layout, etc. Furthermore, a well-designed Web page will include
content and design elements which are inappropriate in an e-mail version. I
would not personally put effort into generating and maintaining both a Web and
an e-mail version of all documents and I do not think this is a realistic
long-term proposition. I understand the duplication also results in additional
maintenance work and think we should avoid any unnecessary overhead in this
area.
In terms of information content, the Web pages I have been involved in
developing for CIDOC fall into three distinct categories:
the full text of reports, such as fact sheets and documentation guidelines:
these are comparable to printed publications (and indeed the current CIDOC set
are all available in printed form) and are relatively static; I think it is
very
useful to have this type of material available as Web documents, with the
ability to move around the report and switch to other linked reports;
pages with specific sets of information about the Committee, standards, etc.,
any of which may be updated as new information comes to hand; these also seem
ideal as Web documents;
formal Committee papers, such as the Rules, similar in concept to ICOM material
such as the Statutes; these are largely static in content and formal in nature.
Given their significance as formal business documents, I would argue that the
third group should be available and maintained in parallel Web and e-mail
versions, with equal care taken in the design of both versions. I think this
applies to a number of the current ICOM-originated documents, but very few of
those that will be produced by the Committees. I am unconvinced it is a
priority
to have e-mail versions of the other two types of page.
Andrew Roberts
[log in to unmask]
21 March 1996
|
