W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2010

Re: no change proposal for ISSUE-55, but a new plan for @profile

From: Tantek Çelik <tantek@cs.stanford.edu>
Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 16:24:34 -0800
Message-ID: <60cb038a1002191624w55a5576aj9dd4db91c04bf0cf@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 2:55 PM, Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc> wrote:
> Hi Julian,
>
> While I'm still unconvinced of the value of profile, I think this is a
> great plan for going forward!

Hi Jonas and thanks for your kind words.

I will agree with you that there is still a burden upon the editor and
authors to demonstrate the value of a generalized profile attribute on
all elements.

> I especially like that this puts RDFa, microdata and @profile on equal
> footing, clearly indicating to authors that they are free to choose
> whichever mechanism they like the most.

Agreed. With the microdata (syntax & processing) draft being separated
out from HTML5, this path made the most sense.  It also provides an
explicit deliberately forward-compatible path for use of microformats
in HTML5, and the opportunity for the various extensions to
borrow/share from each other as they see fit in the interest of
informing and improving all of them.

>
> / Jonas
>

Thanks,

Tantek


> On Fri, Feb 19, 2010 at 12:36 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> First of all: apologies for the late response to the call for a change
>> proposal for ISSUE-55. The last update for ISSUE-55 was the following
>> proposed specification:
>>
>>   http://html5.digitalbazaar.com/specs/html5-epb.html
>>
>> As you know, most WG members have been very busy the previous week; in
>> particular Manu who has been working on getting the RDFa WG up and running.
>>
>> At this point, Manu, Tantek, and I do not propose to apply a change to HTML5
>> itself. ISSUE-55 can be closed by amicable resolution.
>>
>> In the interest of transparency and better communication, we think the
>> following is a better path forward and want to give a heads up in case there
>> are others with similar interests (or skepticisms).
>>
>> We are now discussing a separate extension specification, with a relation to
>> HTML5 similar to RDFa-in-HTML and Microdata. This proposed specification
>> will be composed of three main sections:
>>
>> 1) A normative section, introducing the profile attribute on all elements in
>> HTML5.
>> 2) An informative section, listing known HTML 4.01 errata regarding the
>> profile attribute on the head element
>> 3) An informative section, describing how this specification could be
>> applied to both previous versions of HTML and XHTML, and other markup
>> languages.
>>
>> At present there are three supporters of this approach: Tantek, Manu and
>> myself.
>>
>> We consider the generalization of the profile attribute to all elements to
>> be new information and outside the scope of ISSUE-55.
>>
>> The proposal also parallels some discussion that has happened in the RDFa
>> and microformats communities during the past two years. Namely, allowing the
>> profile attribute to exist on all elements as a method for scoping the
>> inclusion and definition of vocabularies.
>>
>> The draft will be collaboratively and transparently edited at the following
>> location:
>>
>>   http://microformats.org/wiki/html5-profile
>>
>> We hope that a FPWD-ready specification should be complete at the end of
>> March, but will only propose a FPWD at that time if we feel that the work is
>> ready.
>>
>> Best regards, Julian (assisted by Manu and Tantek)
>>
>>
>>
>
>



-- 
http://tantek.com/
Received on Saturday, 20 February 2010 00:25:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:02 GMT