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

Re: HTML+RDFa Heartbeat Draft publishing request

From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 08:07:13 -0600
Message-ID: <643cc0271001130607n16af9d2cs38502cc2acee3c34@mail.gmail.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On Wed, Jan 13, 2010 at 4:08 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote:
> Larry Masinter wrote:
>>>
>>> Feedback on the current draft would be appreciated:
>>> http://html5.digitalbazaar.com/specs/rdfa.html
>>
>> Alas, this specification also fails to fit within the charter of the HTML
>> working group also.
>>
>> While it does supply a mechanism to permit
>> RDFa to be mixed into HTML documents, thus actually
>> addressing *one* of the examples given, the charter
>> encourages *a* mechanism for mixing independently
>> developed vocabularies.
>>
>> (For those who need clarification: in English, the use
>> of the indefinite article "a" in "a mechanism, indicates
>> the singular: one, not "one or more" not "several" not
>> "one for each".)
>>
>> The HTML+RDFa doesn't address how to mix any other
>> independently developed vocabulary into HTML documents --
>> not any of the other two examples given in the charter,
>> (ITS and Ruby) nor any others.
>>
>> Do you think it is possible to use the method proposed
>> here for RDF to apply to any other vocabulary?
>>
>> Could the Microdata vocabulary be put into a namespace
>> and then used through this extensibility mechanism?
>
> I agree with Larry -- the charter *clearly* doesn't ask for RDFa or (similar
> extensions) to be added, but for an extension mechanism that allows to add
> those.
>
> "The HTML WG is encouraged to provide a mechanism to permit independently
> developed vocabularies such as Internationalization Tag Set (ITS), Ruby, and
> RDFa to be mixed into HTML documents. Whether this occurs through the
> extensibility mechanism of XML, whether it is also allowed in the classic
> HTML serialization, and whether it uses the DTD and Schema modularization
> techniques, is for the HTML WG to determine."
>
> And no, this isn't *twisting* the charter (->
> <http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20100113#l-552>), it's *reading* it.
>
> That being said, I'd like the W3C to work on metadata extensions for HTML,
> and do not care particularly where it happens. We already published
> RDFa-in-HTML, so I wouldn't object to Microdata as well, as long as it
> remains clear that it has exactly the same status with respect to document
> validity.
>
> Best regards, Julian
>
>

If Julian's and Larry's requests/concerns are addressed, I would be
willing to withdraw my objection to publishing the Microdata document,
and would also support publication of the RDFa document.

Shelley
Received on Wednesday, 13 January 2010 14:07:45 GMT

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