W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > June 2008

rdf AND rdf-a?

From: Michael Smethurst <Michael.Smethurst@bbc.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:46:43 +0100
Message-ID: <C758DF305837284A8DA71883046BC74E041E4ACD@bbcxue219.national.core.bbc.co.uk>
To: <public-lod@w3.org>
Morning all

The site I'm working on uses microformats fairly heavily. And we've encountered all the usual problems: accessibility, lack of namespacing / scope etc. Anyway for accessibility reasons we've just updated our standards to prohibit the use of the microformat abbreviation design pattern (so most interesting microformats). This may change when we do a little more testing but there's no date for that so it's looking like microformats are bye-bye

Pretty soon (honest) we'll be putting RDF views of the data live

So my questions are:

- if we have full RDF, should we also be using rdf-a?

- if so what would be the benefits (yahoo search stuff?)?

- and what would be the costs (ham-fisted html hackers wrecking the templates springs to mind ;) )?

any pointers much appreciated

ta

michael 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/
This e-mail (and any attachments) is confidential and may contain personal views which are not the views of the BBC unless specifically stated.
If you have received it in error, please delete it from your system.
Do not use, copy or disclose the information in any way nor act in reliance on it and notify the sender immediately.
Please note that the BBC monitors e-mails sent or received.
Further communication will signify your consent to this.
					
Received on Tuesday, 10 June 2008 09:48:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:16 UTC