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

Re: Consumer guidance

From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 18:48:07 +0000
Cc: HTML Data Task Force WG <public-html-data-tf@w3.org>
Message-Id: <3A884F5D-20AD-42FF-9A2A-7EABF9049EC1@jenitennison.com>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Ivan,

On 23 Nov 2011, at 14:31, Ivan Herman wrote:
> On Nov 23, 2011, at 15:16 , Jeni Tennison wrote:
>>> Hm. I am not 100% sure I understand what this means... I would rather say something along the lines that the consumer should be prepared to the fact that the published material may include references to other vocabularies (typing, predicates, etc) that the consumer does not necessarily know about. In such a case, the consumer should ignore those references but should by no means influence consuming vocabulary items that it understands. This is, for example, a very important aspect of schema.org that was not made clear at the initial announcement: consumer may safely mix schema.org and, say, good relations terms for the same resource; schema.org will just pick its own terms out of the structure and live happily with that.
>> 
>> OK, the document does say that within
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/wiki/Choosing_an_HTML_Data_Format#Good_Consumption_Practice
>> 
>> Perhaps that needs to be more prominent. Where would you recommend moving it to?
> 
> Maybe not moving, but repeating some of this under the producer side 'vocabulary consideration'. Producers should know about this, they should know how consumers react to such a situation. And consumers should publish their behaviour on this respectů

Hmm. The bit at 

http://www.w3.org/wiki/Choosing_an_HTML_Data_Format#Choosing_a_Publishing_Format

under which is the section on Vocabulary Considerations, is really about the situation where you're choosing a single format to publish in. I've reworded the introduction to that section to hopefully make that clearer:

  This section addresses a situation where all your target consumers 
  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 of these formats to use. It's assumed that you will 
  want to choose a single format rather than mixing multiple formats, as 
  this will mean less markup in your page and make your publishing task 
  easier.

I do have some words in 
  http://www.w3.org/wiki/Mixing_HTML_Data_Formats#Consuming_Pages_with_Multiple_Formats

already too. Maybe when I put all this into ReSpec I can create a best practice box that will make it pop out more.

>> OK, I added some pointers at
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/wiki/Choosing_an_HTML_Data_Format#Tooling_Considerations
>> 
>> Could you take a look and see if that's enough?
> 
> There is also a microdata in json, more exactly a mapping definition from md to JSON:
> 
> http://dev.w3.org/html5/md/Overview.html#json
> 
> worth adding. As for RDFa, there is an API doc WD:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-rdfa-api-20110419/
> 
> although it is not clear what the fate of this will be in future.


I did link to both of those in that section.

Jeni
-- 
Jeni Tennison
http://www.jenitennison.com
Received on Wednesday, 23 November 2011 18:48:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 23 November 2011 18:48:37 GMT