W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > April 2007

Re: HREF attribute in elements other than A and LINK

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 17 Apr 2007 14:51:54 +0200
Message-ID: <4624C2EA.6050502@w3.org>
To: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
CC: mark.birbeck@x-port.net, RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
+1 with all your arguments!


Ben Adida wrote:
> (Chair hat off)
> Mark Birbeck wrote:
> [...]
>> My point about starting with a 'mental model' is only to suggest that
>> we look at how something fits with existing HTML, and existing
>> practice. The idea was simply that if we're happy with the model we
>> can look at how we explain it to other people. (It's actually how
>> nearly everything in RDFa has been designed, just not always
>> explicitly.)
> So, I'm not happy with the model of adding HREF everywhere in something
> called XHTML1.1+RDFa. Mark, you've always pointed out that RDFa is
> primarily aimed at HTML authors adding semantic markup. I mostly agree
> with you. With that assumption, I can only imagine an HTML author being
> thoroughly confused by HREF everywhere, wondering, "where's the
> clickable link? How do I *make* it clickable?". Why would an HTML author
> do this? What is the use case that would lead him to put an HREF on a
> DIV as far as the HTML author is concerned? This adds a whole level of
> inherently invisible metadata, where the primary goal of RDFa is to mark
> up visible data.
> Regarding acceptability of this approach, I'm in full agreement with
> Ivan on this: the backlash against this will be enormous. We *have* to
> plan for it, and, more importantly, we have to ask ourselves: what is
> the cost/benefit of this quasi-ensured backlash? I see a high cost, and
> I don't see the benefit wrt our goals.
> Finally, the biggest worry I have is regarding the perception of this
> change. If we add HREF in a bunch of places, we're really changing the
> document model for HTML in ways that even adding REL didn't do (since
> that is still about marking up visible content). It's not XHTML1.1
> anymore. It's clearly XHTML1.2. And the perception will be that we're
> trying to squeeze XHTML2 features into XHTML1 via RDFa. That is a
> dangerous proposition: we should not make RDFa an even bigger lightning
> bolt for criticism, if we can help it.
> -Ben


Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
URL: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
PGP Key: http://www.cwi.nl/%7Eivan/AboutMe/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Tuesday, 17 April 2007 12:51:30 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:22 UTC