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

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

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 20:20:53 +0200
Message-ID: <4AD8B985.8000307@xn--mlform-iua.no>
To: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
CC: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>, public-html@w3.org
James Graham On 09-10-16 18.03:

> 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.

Paving your way ≠ paving a cowpath. RDFa included would've raised 
its attention too. Nice that Ian didn't wait for consensus ...

The disadvantage is the advantage: more focus on what's left. 
Should (re)moval cause some of those who favor Microdata to 
themselves loose interest, then that's a separate issue.

We have had more than one ironic comment from e.g. Henri about 
e.g. the Alistpart "bretheren" - often in connection with XHTML. 
Since I joined this group, I never understood how representatives 
of "alternative browsers" (to borrow from Opera's self 
characterization) - themselves having grown strong through the 
evangelism about 'better standard support' (including XHTML 
support) to a receptive audience  of (amongst others) standards 
advocates (which web author isn't one, these days?) - can be so 
scornful towards groups that have actively worked to get authors 
and the rest of the opinion to think in the right direction, 
thereby having helped your own momentum.

Simultaneously you want Microdata to benefit from the standards 
support of the masses, by being added to HTML 5 *spec*. You think 
you can live without the help of the advocates now? Or do you 
think that the advocates will automatically support whatever HTML 
5 looks like as long as it can be stamped "standard"?

As Shelley said earlier: I am impressed by this belief in HTML 5.
-- 
leif halvard silli
Received on Friday, 16 October 2009 18:21:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:09 UTC