Re: minutes for HTML WG f2f, 2011-11-04, part 1

On Wed, 09 Nov 2011 00:16:00 +0100, Peter Winnberg  
<peter.winnberg@gmail.com> wrote:

> 2011/11/8 Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>:
>>
>> The main problem with a global attribute is that it would make it less  
>> clear
>> which attribute takes precedence and whether or not the value is  
>> resolved as
>> a URL, as previously discussed. [1][2] Further, what would the global
>> attribute be? value="" already exists with different semantics on  
>> <button>,
>> <option>, <input>, <li>, <meter>, <progress> and <param>. content="" is  
>> not
>> an option since RDFa uses it (in the early days microdata had both a
>> property="" and an about="" attribute and there were objections to  
>> this).
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13240#c17
>> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Oct/0166.html
>>
>
> First of all, I don’t think that a global attribute that could be used
> anywhere would be the best solution. For example let’s say that it
> would be possible to use this attribute on a div that contains contact
> information. If someone then tries to get the attribute to hold vCard
> data as a machine-readable version of the div it seems like this could
> get very messy.
>
> I assumed that the attribute only would hold non-URL data (i.e., a
> literal without type/lang with RDF terms). If it should be able to
> hold both that and URLs then yes this would get more complicated.

Great, it sounds like we agree that a global attribute is a bad idea.

> If it was specified in a way so that it cannot hold URLs, why cannot
> the content attribute found in RDFa be used ( see [1] for how it is
> specified. )?
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-core/#A-content

In the early days microdata had both a property="" and an about=""  
attribute and there were objections to this because it overlapped with  
RDFa.

-- 
Philip Jägenstedt
Core Developer
Opera Software

Received on Wednesday, 9 November 2011 09:28:04 UTC