Re: RDFa and Microformats

Manu Sporny wrote:
> Martin McEvoy wrote:
>   
>> Talking of  "hacks" why is this NOT a "hack" :
>> http://wiki.digitalbazaar.com/en/HAudio_RDFa? it looks like a direct rip
>> from the Microformats wiki,
>>     
>
> That's because it started out as a direct rip from the Microformats wiki
>   
it still is
> - the fact that it is so close to hAudio was deliberate. The intention
> was to create a cross-community vocabulary that would work for people
> jumping between RDFa and Microformats. 
what people?  hAudio is not yet even a draft proposal, and all these 
Publisher were Jumping around between vocabularies, that's interesting 
show me where?
> The outcome of that research was
> this:
>   
By the W3C, the Microformats Community...?
> http://purl.org/media/audio
>
> The Audio RDF Vocabulary above has a clean/direct mapping to/from
> Microformats hAudio.
>   
So you say...
> The hAudio RDFa specification was replaced by the Audio RDF Vocabulary
> several months ago. I have added a note to the page you linked to in
> order to make that decision more clear and highlight the historical
> nature of that document[1].
> If there are "hacks", please enlighten me because I am unaware of there
> being any and I would certainly want to fix them if they exist.
>
>   
I don't think you can Manu. The damage has been done already.
>> RDFa is Behaving a little like "The Borg" dont you think,  "You will be
>> assimilated"  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borg_(Star_Trek) :-)
>>     
>
>   

Best wishes

Martin