Talk:Web document

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Article motivations

There are NO STANDARD (or "more authoritative") definition.

HERE, on article, we can fix better (consensual) definition. It needed for support other articles.

-- User:Krauss

Examples of other definitions

"An HTML document that is browsable on the Web", umich.edu.

"A file or set of related files that can be transferred from a Web server to a Web client. The document can contain text, graphics, sound, video, or links to other documents", sympatico.ca

"(...) Many related Web document make up a Web presentation", scism.sbu.ac.uk.

[edit] Definition notes about old definition

Web Document is a extended (and more informal) concept for web page, to be protocol independent and format independent. Is to be required only that web document:

  1. Is being transferred on any Internet communication protocol.
  2. Format: any valid MIME Content-Type and usual format.

A PDF document requested from SFTP or SMTP protocols, for example, is a web document, but not a web page. On the other hand, all web page is also a web document.

About the 2 condictions:

  • They are not axioms, are informal, and like a fuzzy set.
  • About cond. 1 (transferred): see also application layer. The primary objective (and difference from generic documents) is the web accessibility, since the benefits are many and obvious.
  • Cond. 2 (another mode to say "usual format"): there are a "standard method" to transform (exactly) the web document into a file (or a "hub file"), and this file can be viewed with a usual (and usually configured) web browser.

[edit] What is and what not?

[edit] Original research or need of references?

We need this article (and web document concept) on Wikipedia? It is a "original research concept"??

Please comment your position here (below).

Just try to keep adding citations (as I see you have done already) to help put this article in the context of pre-existing usage. If I come across good cites I will add as well. IMHO, the article is steadily improving, so this should be less and less an issue over time. Thanks! dr.ef.tymac 16:57, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Sugestions

New sugestions for review and/or redo parts of the article.

[edit] About Lead section

See WP Lead Sec. and WP intro style.

  1. put the comparation list into a table, like below.
  2. put back the definition basic concepts (see #Definition_notes_about_old_definition: the 2 requeriments/conditions/axioms and a explicit for of "all web page is also a web document" (container concept). Perhaps something about "... while XML and Fast Infoset is not wide wide used.. is necessary remember web docs".

Comparation table sugestion:

                WPage           Wdoc
Main prot.      HTTP            HTTP or etc.
Main format     HTML            HTML or etc.
Context         Page            Page or comp., attach., etc.
Viewer          Browser         Browser or Mime-def. app.

"The first sentence should give (...) relevant characterization of the subject. If the subject is amenable to definition, the first sentence should give a concise one that puts the article in context. Rather than being typically technical, it should be a concise, conceptually sound, characterization driven, encyclopedic definition." WP intro style. I think if table is concise (and not grow) it can stay there. -- Krauss 2 December 2006

[edit] "web template series" table

I think this article is not a relevant part of the "Web Template Systems outdoor" (table on lead section). The (wiki history of) creation/motivations stay on Talk page, not go to the article. If on webdoc stay links at "See also" section, and on articles series have concistense on links, terminology defs., etc. about webdoc, is sufficient. -- Krauss 2 December 2006

DONE: Remove lead table. I do think the lead table is related to this, especially since 'web document' is a central concept to the template system series, but 'web document' also applies to other areas (such as web services, email attachements etc.) so agree with taking it out. This presents another situation, however, where extra support may be needed from primary authority. If we say "web document" is an essential term to understand the template system series, it is easier to justify it as an independent term. If we say it is an independent term, and it stands on its own merit as a separate article, we may need additional support for that, so the article can withstand closer scrutiny. dr.ef.tymac 15:12, 2 December 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../w/e/b/Talk%7EWeb_document_c013.html"