W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > December 2012

Re: CfC: Request transition of HTML Microdata to Candidate Recommendation

From: Lin Clark <lin.w.clark@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 14:55:36 +0000
Message-ID: <CACho_AsbMY8En6skGsPR3v1ya-1a6qqCBc0pKwD88sJQgEpm3A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Andreas Kuckartz <A.Kuckartz@ping.de>
Cc: public-html@w3.org
Regarding the parser output, I can't speak to what changes have been made
in the parser code since I posted that nearly a month ago. Since I pinged a
number of people on IRC about it when I was testing (including one of the
implementers), posted about it in the Drupal issue, and my email was
retweeted and referenced, I expect that it would have been called out
earlier if I had been mistaken then.

Regarding the Drupal issue... to ensure we're being clear, it was fixed
with an override in a module that only 15 sites use. It was NOT fixed in
core. That leaves hundreds of thousands of Drupal sites exposing data that
was parsed one way when they configured the site, and is now parsed in a
different way. As I point out, for my example the Ubiquity RDFa 1.0 parser
still returns the data that previously would have been parsed, and it
extracts a literal value for the skos:prefLabel value.

Please be aware this isn't an effort to discredit RDFa... I am actively
working on RDFa support, so I do have an understanding of the differences,
some of which advantage RDFa. However, the proponents of RDFa need to be
more open and clearer about the very real difficulties that implementers
face. I don't think that we do ourselves any favors by glossing over the
real problems users are running into.

-Lin


On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 6:18 AM, Andreas Kuckartz <A.Kuckartz@ping.de>wrote:

> I just tried the two different RDF distillers with the RDFa example
> pointed to by Lin Clark.
>
> One result was this:
>
> ---
> @prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
> @prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
> @prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
>
> <> dc:subject [ rdfs:label </plain/?q=taxonomy/term/1>;
>             skos:prefLabel </plain/?q=taxonomy/term/1> ] .
>
> </plain/?q=taxonomy/term/1> a skos:Concept .
> ---
>
> The other one was that:
>
> ---
> @prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
> @prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
> @prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
> @prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> .
>
> <> dc:subject [ rdfs:label </plain/?q=taxonomy/term/1>;
>      skos:prefLabel </plain/?q=taxonomy/term/1>] .
>
> </plain/?q=taxonomy/term/1> a skos:Concept .
> ---
>
> For me that is the same, because the unused prefix rdf does not count.
>
> The Drupal issue mentioned (http://drupal.org/node/1848464) also was
> resolved one day after Lin Clark sent the mail.
>
> Cheers,
> Andreas
> ---
>
> Lin Clark on November 28, 2012, wrote:
>
> > For example,
> > if you parse this test
> > page<
> http://lin-clark.com/sites/default/files/md-candidaterec-rdfasnippet.html
> >with
> > RDF
> > distiller <http://rdf.greggkellogg.net/distiller> (written by the new
> RDFa
> > Test Suite author) vs the W3C's distiller
> > <http://www.w3.org/2012/pyRdfa>(written by one of the RDFa 1.1
> > editors), you get different results. This
> > isn't a theoretical issue, it's an actual issue posted last
> > week<http://drupal.org/node/1848464>to the Drupal.org issue queue.
> > This puts a strain on data publishers and
> > the tool authors (like me) who support them.
>



-- 
Lin Clark
Drupal Consultant

lin-clark.com
twitter.com/linclark
Received on Friday, 21 December 2012 05:52:33 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 December 2012 05:52:34 GMT