- From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 08:07:13 -0600
- 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 UTC