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

Re: CfC: Publish HTML5 Microdata as First Public Working Draft and a new HTML5 Working Draft

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 06:36:43 +0100
Message-ID: <4B4C0A6B.1090901@gmx.de>
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
CC: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, HTML WG Public List <public-html@w3.org>
Ian Hickson wrote:
> Having just "HTML" in the name makes it sound like it's an independent 
> spec that one can consider part of HTML, or ignore. It makes it sound like 

Indeed. As far as I can tell, that was the intent, and what the WG decided.

> a candidate for "relevant specification", in HTML5 terms. I believe 
> Microdata should be considered an integral part of HTML5. Whether that is 
> by having a single specification for HTML5, or having HTML5 split into 
> modules with Microdata being one of them, I don't really mind. I would be 
> fine with calling the draft "HTML Microdata" or just "Microdata", provided 
> that the spec clearly stated it was part of an HTML5 family of 
> specifications. What I object to is making Microdata a second-class 

Do we have a definition of "HTML5 family of specifications"?

> citizen that, e.g., validators can validly claim is not part of HTML5.

It is not. The same way RDFa isn't.

Do we need a clarification from the chairs?

Best regards, Julian
Received on Tuesday, 12 January 2010 05:37:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:57 GMT