W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-data-tf@w3.org > November 2011

Re: Guidance for Publishers

From: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 2 Nov 2011 15:20:35 +0000
Message-ID: <CAGR+nnFU_The89HXxEqQ0h+KrsQTOTYizO5cxK91jQTi7J80Vw@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
Cc: HTML Data Task Force WG <public-html-data-tf@w3.org>
On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 8:48 AM, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Based on the discussions that we've had over the past month, I've started
> to flesh out guidance for publishers in the wiki [1], which for ease of
> reference I've copied below.
>
> Please could you read, make any obvious editorial changes yourself and
> raise any issues or points for discussion here.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeni
>
> ---
>
> You are likely to find that the markup within your pages is simpler and
> easier to maintain if you only use one format (syntax and vocabulary)
> within each page. To decide which to use, your first consideration has to
> be which consumers will read the data within your web pages, and which
> formats they support. These may include:
>
> * scripting libraries
> * browsers and browser plug-ins
> * general-purpose search engines
> * vertical or domain-specific search engines
> * data reusers with whom you have agreements
>
> Your second consideration may be the current state of the tooling to
> support a particular format. For example:
>
> ;Are you able to publish using HTML5?
> :If you are using a content-management system that doesn't support adding
> new attributes such as <code>@itemprop</code> or <code>@typeof</code>, or
> if your publishing guidelines require validity against an older version of
> HTML or XHTML, then you will be constrained to using microformats.
>

In the case where the validation against an older version of XHTML is
required, RDFa is also an alternative (provided you can add new attributes).

Steph.


> ;Are there development tools available?
> :Because it is not visible within a web page, it can be hard to tell
> whether HTML data has been written correctly. Consumers should provide
> validators that enable you to check that your data has been correctly
> detected and interpreted, but you may also want to consider tool support
> for generating the HTML data.
>
> Once you have considered both your target consumers and the tooling
> support that is available, you will be in one of four situations:
>
> # '''with a single choice of format''' in which case you are good to go
> # '''unable to publish HTML data that your target consumers understand'''
> in which case you either have to lobby those consumers to add support for
> the format(s) you can publish in, or consider changing your toolset so that
> you can publish in something they understand
> # '''still with a choice between a number of formats''' in which case you
> will want to pick one (see below)
> # '''having to use multiple formats at the same time to provide data to
> all your target customers''' in which case you will need to mix formats
> within your pages (see below)
>
> === Choosing a Publishing Format ===
>
> This section addresses a situation where all the consumers that you as a
> publisher want to target recognise a set of formats (each with a particular
> syntax and vocabulary), your toolset supports publishing in all of them,
> and you need to make a choice about which to use.
>
> ==== Syntax Considerations ====
>
> The different syntaxes -- microformats, microdata and RDFa -- have
> different capabilities which may inform your choice.
>
> ;Structured HTML values
> :Under appropriate conditions, RDFa and microformats will use markup
> within the content of an element to provide a property value; in microdata
> values never retain markup. If property values within your page contain
> markup (for example <code>description</code>s containing emphasised text,
> multiple paragraphs, tables and so on), you may want to use RDFa or
> microformats to ensure that structure is available to consumers of your
> pages.
> ;Language support
> :Microformats and RDFa use the language of the HTML elements in the page
> (from the <code>lang</code> attribute) to indicate the language of relevant
> values. In microdata, the vocabulary has to provide a separate mechanism to
> indicate a language (pending resolution of [
> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14470 bug 14470]). If you
> have multi-lingual information in your pages, you may find it easier to use
> microformats or RDFa than microdata.
>
> TODO: Other guidelines?
>
> ==== Vocabulary Considerations ====
>
> Vocabularies and syntaxes are closely tied together, especially in the
> case of microformats. Aspects of a vocabulary to bear in mind are:
>
> * How closely does it match with the information that you have?
> * How much support does it have? Are there tools for validating and
> viewing it? Is there good documentation?
> * How stable is it? Who has control to make changes to it? How frequently
> might those changes be made?
> * Are other consumers likely to adopt it in the future?
>
> ==== Usability Considerations ====
>
> The usability of a particular format is likely to depend on your existing
> expertise and the match between the structure and content of your web pages
> and the required structure and content of the format. The best thing to do
> is to try using the format to mark up an example page from your site.
>
> TODO: Example?
>
> === Publishing in Multiple Formats ===
>
> TODO: further guidance on publishing in multiple formats
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/wiki/Choosing_an_HTML_Data_Format#Publishers
> --
> Jeni Tennison
> http://www.jenitennison.com
>
>
>
Received on Wednesday, 2 November 2011 15:44:02 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 2 November 2011 15:44:03 GMT