- From: Ben Adida <ben@mit.edu>
- Date: Thu, 12 Oct 2006 17:21:35 -0400
- To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- CC: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
Dan Connolly wrote: > Microformats uses the class attribute in several ways; the idiom > you describe is only one of them. That's a nice way to put it. Another way to put it is that microformats abuse the CLASS attribute to declare both types and relationships between types, very much confusing the two. In one microformat, class="foo" might mean a type foo, while in another microformat it might mean a foo relationship between two things. So you need to know which microformat you're dealing with to know how to parse it. That's the kind of inconsistency and unpredictability we're trying to move away from with RDFa. > > [...] > > If I understand this proposal, I would (also?) get triples a la... > > _:span1 rdf:type :summary. > _:anchor2 rdf:type :url . > > which is very much unexpected. Do you expect the CSS to apply different styling rules depending on which interpretation of CLASS this particular microformat chose? I suspect not. In other words, you expect CSS to blindly say "anything with CLASS=x I'm going to style as an instance of the CLASS x." And that's exactly what our RDFa interpretation is. The exact semantics you're expecting from the HTML, expressed as RDF. I think that's quite a bit more consistent than the microformat approach, where you have to look up the microformat definition to figure out what that CLASS attribute really means. -Ben
Received on Thursday, 12 October 2006 21:21:34 UTC