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

Re: Draft Note for HTML WG

From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 14:08:35 -0500
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
CC: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>, HTML Data Task Force WG <public-html-data-tf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <689EE5D4-F60A-4405-B054-A901B1F0F1FD@greggkellogg.net>
On Nov 14, 2011, at 9:45 AM, Ivan Herman wrote:

> Jeni,
> 
> my apologies to have missed that earlier.
> 
> I think there was a discussion (but I wonder whether it was on this list, actually) on issues of handling elements like <time> or <data> in RDFa, too. Note that those are issues are, formally, for the HTML5+RDFa and not for RDFa Core, ie, formally on the plate of the HTML5 WG.

There's been some discussion in the RDFWA WG list about use of <time> and <data> for the HTML+RDFa profile (and I think the XHTML+RDFa profile as well). There is some indication that the HTML5 WG will continue to tweak <time>, extending the range of possible datatypes represented (IMO a good thing). This will make it difficult to synchronize the texts of the various specs, but we should try to have equivalent semantics. The same may go for <object> with @data being an additional resource attribute.

Other than multiple types, another open issue with Microdata to RDF is the default behavior given multi-valued properties. The sense of the group seems to be that they remain unordered, rather than retaining the DOM-based ordering in the Microdata API and JSON serialization.

> But this is just for completeness. It looks good...

Agreed.

Gregg

> Cheers
> 
> Ivan
> 
> 
> 
> On Nov 14, 2011, at 18:25 , Jeni Tennison wrote:
> 
>> Second draft incorporating Ivan and Dan's comments. I'll be sending this as-is tomorrow morning unless I hear anything more.
>> 
>> Jeni
>> 
>> ---
>> 
>> The Task Force was put together by W3C in response to the TAG's note [1] about inconsistencies between microdata [2] and HTML+RDFa 1.1 [3]. Our goals are to perform a technical analysis of the relationships between microdata, RDFa and microformats with the goals of:
>> 
>> * raising bugs where incompatibilities could be reduced through spec changes
>> * documenting guidance for publishers and consumers of these formats
>> * drafting mappings that help consumers merge data from different formats
>> 
>> Discussions are taking place on the public-html-data-tf@w3.org mailing list [4] and the products of the Task Force are currently being drafted within the wiki [5]. Of particular note is the development of an editor's draft for a mapping from microdata to RDF [6].
>> 
>> Several of the issues that led to the TAG's comments were addressed or raised as bugs/issues in the time between the TAG's comments being raised and the formation of the Task Force. For example, the mapping from microdata to RDF in the microdata specification was removed. RDFa 1.1 Lite (now an editor's draft [7]) was also announced during this period.
>> 
>> There are two outstanding HTML bugs on microdata and HTML-RDFa of interest to the Task Force, on:
>> 
>> * language handling in microdata [8]
>> * allowing <link> and <meta> elements in flow content when they have RDFa attributes [9]
>> 
>> as well as a number of issues on RDFa-Core that are rapidly being resolved.
>> 
>> We had some discussion with Hixie about support for multiple types from different vocabularies in microdata, but do not intend to raise a bug on this.
>> 
>> I anticipate there may be other issues raised, specifically on:
>> 
>> * mismatches in the resolution of URLs in HTML5 and IRIs in RDF, and its impact on RDFa processing [10]
>> * mismatches in the set of link relations supported by HTML5 and microformats compared to RDFa [11]
>> * lack of support for representing structured HTML values in microdata [12]
>> 
>> The Task Force will be wrapped up by the end of the year. It may be that there are outstanding bugs when that happens, and it is likely that there will continue to be work to do to keep the guidance relevant if (as is likely) HTML5/microdata/RDFa change past that point. Part of the wrapping up of the Task Force will be recommending the appropriate groups to which to hand off that work.
>> 
>> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Jun/0366.html
>> [2] http://dev.w3.org/html5/md/
>> [3] http://dev.w3.org/html5/rdfa/
>> [4] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html-data-tf/
>> [5] http://www.w3.org/wiki/Html-data-tf
>> [6] https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/htmldata/raw-file/default/microdata-rdf/index.html
>> [7] http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-lite/
>> [8] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14470
>> [9] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=14114
>> [10] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2011Oct/0113.html
>> [11] http://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML_Data_Improvements#Link_Relations
>> [12] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-vocabs/2011Nov/0022.html
>> 
>> -- 
>> Jeni Tennison
>> http://www.jenitennison.com
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 14 November 2011 19:10:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 14 November 2011 19:10:28 GMT