W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > October 2009

Re: ISSUE-76: Need feedback on splitting Microdata into separate specification

From: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 18:03:08 +0200
Message-ID: <4AD8993C.5090501@opera.com>
To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
CC: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>, public-html@w3.org
Henri Sivonen wrote:
> On Oct 16, 2009, at 16:35, Shelley Powers wrote:

>> So how can that make you a good judge, even a mediocre judge of what 
>> works "best" when it comes to metadata?
> 
> I'm not suggesting that Microdata is the best solution in the absolute 
> sense. I'm just suggesting that it fixes some flaws that alternative 
> solutions have, so it's better (or less bad). I encourage you to help 
> the WG make Microdata even better.

One point that has not, as far as I can tell, thus far been raised in 
favour of keeping Microdata in the spec: Hixie has previously reported 
that the amount of feedback on sections that have been removed has 
dropped compared to when they were in the main spec (sorry I only 
remember this from IRC and don't have a reference handy). So keeping 
microdata in the main spec ensures that it receives the greatest 
possible amount of input from people interested in HTML5 but unaware of 
all the history behind what is in different documents. Such people exist 
for sure because they regularly appear on IRC asking why X is missing 
from HTML5, where X is a feature that has been spun off into a different 
spec. Having microdata in the HTML5 spec for Last Call in particular 
will ensure that the attention and wide review that happens during the 
this period also focuses attention on microdata, thus helping to improve 
the technology.
Received on Friday, 16 October 2009 16:03:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:50 GMT