Re: GRDDL and HTML5

On Mon, 2008-08-25 at 10:02 +0000, Ian Hickson wrote:
[...]
> To be honest I don't really understand the reluctance from the GRDDL 
> community here. profile="" doesn't work, people don't use it. Surely the 
> right thing to do is to take that into account and fix GRDDL to work with 
> real world content. Why would you want to cling to something that has 
> widely been ignored and will make it harder to use GRDDL on the Web?

The goal of GRDDL is not to scrape data out of pre-existing content
but to let people choose explicitly to put RDF data in their documents.

For that purpose, GRDDL and @profile work just fine.

On Mon, 2008-08-25 at 12:20 +0000, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, Julian Reschke wrote:
> > 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.

Mislead? What evidence leads you to that conclusion?
This is an explicit design choice.
See the "Faithful Renditions" section.
  http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#sec_rend


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
gpg D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E