W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-grddl-comments@w3.org > July to September 2008

Re: GRDDL and HTML5

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 12:20:49 +0000 (UTC)
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>, Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, "Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)" <dbooth@hp.com>, "public-grddl-comments@w3.org" <public-grddl-comments@w3.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.62.0808251214330.7044@hixie.dreamhostps.com>

On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, Julian Reschke wrote:
> Ian Hickson wrote:
> > > 2) Yet we want users to be able to specify their own profiles with 
> > > their own GRDDL transformations in order to explictly license the 
> > > extracted RDF and not force anyone to use any "default" 
> > > transformations.
> > 
> > This isn't what profile="" in HTML4 is for -- at least, not if they 
> > are using formats that do have their own defined profiles. For 
> > example, say you are using hCard. You can give the official hCard 
> > profile, or, you can give your own custom profile that happens to 
> > define a transformation that is exactly like hCard's. But if you do 
> > the latter, you're not technically using hCard, and people who are 
> > looking for profile="" declarations and are _not_ using GRDDL will not 
> > be able to use your pages' hCard data.
> 
> That I agree with.
> 
> > Thus, I posit that 2) is a mis-use of profile="". Certainly, even if 
> > HTML5 had profile="", it wouldn't license the use of the attribute in 
> > this way.
> 
> I would be a mis-use. Is anybody actually suggesting that?

Suggesting what?


> > > 2) For users who use @rel="profile", get the GRDDL transformation 
> > > and then run it over the HTML5 DOM of the page. Minor change.
> > > 
> > > What we need to know from *both* the HTML5 community is simple: is 
> > > @rel="profile" in the spec, and does the community have consensus?
> > 
> > On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, Julian Reschke wrote:
> > > That touches another issue: who owns the namespace of rel values? 
> > > (for which there is not HTNL5 WG consensus either, as far as I can 
> > > tell).
> > 
> > Nobody owns the namespace; you can invent your own value, and then 
> > register it on the wiki:
> 
> Well, that's your opinion; there's no consensus in the HTML WG about 
> that, nor between the W3C and the IETF. Many people have stated they 
> prefer to use the existing IANA registry of Atom link relations.

In either case, the WHATWG is happy to allow the GRDDL team to register 
rel="" values if desired. Whether the GRDDL team recognises the legitimacy 
of this registry is up to them.


> >    http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/RelExtensions
> > 
> > I see rel=profile is already on the list. Personally if you want to use a 
> 
> It points to the definition of head/@profile.
> 
> I also note that none of the extensions has the status "accepted".

Please feel free to form the community that the HTML5 draft defers to, and 
begin approving rel="" values. I would be happy to provie a mailing list 
or forum if you would like one in setting up this community.


> > > Unrelated to that: in case we could agree that head/@profile could 
> > > be substituted by link/@rel=profile with the same meaning, why on 
> > > earth would we then remove head/@profile in the first place? Why 
> > > break it, when its functionality is actually used?
> > 
> > As Harry said, many people don't declare their profiles. So it 
> > shouldn't be needed. The only case where something might be needed is 
> > where you want
> 
> Just because "many do not include" doesn't mean it's not used. There may 
> be code out there that you are not aware of (maybe behind firewalls) 
> that you potentially break by disallowing the attribute.

This seems unlikely, since HTML5 isn't yet complete, and so nobody should 
be using it except experimentally, and HTML4 allows profile="".


> On the other hand, the price of keeping it is zero (or would have been, 
> if we would have started with the existing HTML4 vocabulary).

The price of keeping it is not zero. Just look at the pain it has caused 
the GRDDL effort. Instead of just automatically supporting all known 
vocabularies, the GRDDL team has instead been misled into thinking that 
having pages declare vocabularies is somehow better.


> > an explicit link to a GRDDL transform, just like one might link to a 
> > CSS sheet. But this isn't a profile="" or rel=profile in the 
> > traditional sense, and a custom value for GRDDL would be more 
> > appropriate.
> 
> That's what GRDDL calls link/@rel="transformation" (although qualified 
> by the head/@profile="http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view").

Right.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 25 August 2008 12:21:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 19:55:03 UTC