Talk:Separation of content and presentation

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Separation of content and presentation article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Human–Computer Interaction (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Human–Computer Interaction, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Human–Computer InteractionWikipedia:WikiProject Human–Computer InteractionTemplate:WikiProject Human–Computer InteractionHuman–Computer Interaction articles

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Graphic design High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Graphic design, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of graphic design-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Graphic designWikipedia:WikiProject Graphic designTemplate:WikiProject Graphic designGraphic design articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Writing systems Low‑importance

	Writing portal This article falls within the scope of WikiProject Writing systems, a WikiProject interested in improving the encyclopaedic coverage and content of articles relating to writing systems on Wikipedia. If you would like to help out, you are welcome to drop by the project page and/or leave a query at the project’s talk page.Writing systemsWikipedia:WikiProject Writing systemsTemplate:WikiProject Writing systemsWriting system articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Requested move 12 September 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: moved per consensus. —usernamekiran(talk) 21:07, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Separation of presentation and content → Separation of content and presentation – The content comes first (at least in draft structural form) or there's nothing to present and to wrap any presentation around. Another alternative would be Separation of presentation from content (which also implies the pre-existence of at least a theoretical content structure from which to separate the presentation; see also the closely related form follows function and structure follows strategy concepts). The sources cited are not consistent on the order of the words (or even which are used; some do not use "presentation" at all). — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 07:15, 12 September 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. Steel1943 (talk) 16:56, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Support, per nom, a logical move. Good eye. Randy Kryn (talk) 13:36, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Both are widespread, but in electronic publishing "presentation and content" is the longer established and wider used in substantial sources. Clark (2008) [1] and Cohen (2004) [2] are two of the best known and widely cited within the developer community, 2000-2010, when this was a newish [sic] idea being sold to web developers. It actually dates back to the 1980s, if anyone has a library for the paper sources. Andy Dingley (talk) 14:13, 12 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- Uh, "2000-2010, when this was a newish idea being sold to web developers" is misleading. Separation of content and presentation is central to the entire idea behind CSS, which was introduced in 1994 (after the need to do so had already been under discussion for a long time, as you know), and widely implemented by 1997. No Web developers of the era, other than home-coding amateurs, were unfamiliar with the idea. It's unclear to me why you think two books from one field should determine the word order, when clearly there is no set wording in RS more generally, and the current order is potentially confusing and not WP:CONSISTENT with similar articles. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 18:42, 23 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support. And gentlemen, an en dash is basic English for ranges: 2000–2010. Tony (talk) 01:20, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I just copy-pasted. "Not me, not me!" — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 18:54, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Support – the alphabetical order is more common and more standard when order doesn't matter. Dicklyon (talk) 01:39, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hadn't even thought of that, but it's another reason to move it. — SMcCandlish ☺ ☏ ¢ ≽^ʌⱷ҅_ᴥⱷ^ʌ≼ 18:54, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

LaTex, forsooth

I strongly object to Latex being called a markup language or supposedly having a role in SoCaP. Latex embeds presentation in content. You might as well say that Word native format is a "markup language".

Better example is XML as it's used in technical writing. I'll have to revise this article accordingly sometime soon. Isaac Rabinovitch (talk) 18:20, 27 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kristin Straley porn videos

Open the videos and I will get the truth and I will get closure I need 2001:5B0:260B:49E8:55D8:3EF1:6ED7:40E6 (talk) 05:33, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Semantic markup

Beginning in the 1980s technical writers began working to improve documentation and the publishing process by recognizing that content development (writing, usually) is a separate effort than presentation (graphics, typography). First came GML and SGML (first used to mark up legal documents using semantic tags). HTML is a subset of SGML but got corrupted by presentation-oriented tags and attributes (<bold>, for example). DocBook and DITA are two widely-used XML grammars that use elements named for their semantic role (title, task, step, stepresult, and so on). Hoping someone from that world has time and energy to add a section on it. I'm from that world, but had just enough time to write this. 108.2.169.181 (talk) 12:59, 18 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]