W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > February 2009

Re: RDFa and Web Directions North 2009

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2009 10:22:05 +0100
Message-ID: <49968D3D.8040403@gmx.de>
To: Jeremy Carroll <jeremy@topquadrant.com>
CC: 'Ian Hickson' <ian@hixie.ch>, 'Kjetil Kjernsmo' <kjetil@kjernsmo.net>, 'Karl Dubost' <karl@la-grange.net>, 'Kingsley Idehen' <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, public-rdfa@w3.org, 'RDFa mailing list' <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, 'Sam Ruby' <rubys@intertwingly.net>, 'Dan Brickley' <danbri@danbri.org>, 'Michael Bolger' <michael@michaelbolger.net>, 'Tim Berners-Lee' <timbl@w3.org>, 'Dan Connolly' <connolly@w3.org>
Jeremy Carroll wrote:
 > Mark Birbeck:
 >> But the attributes in RDFa are not prefixed -- @about, @resource,
 >> @datatype and @content are new attributes, whilst @rel, @rev, @href
 >> and @src already exist
 >
 > At a wild guess, this is the heart of the technical disagreement:
 > The additional 4 attributes might cost too much for people who do not 
need or want or gain benefit from RDFa.

The implementation cost of these attributes is zero: recipients are not 
required to do anything with them.

Documenting them (in tutorials, books...) is not free, but then, if you 
aren't interested in them, why document them?

 > Might it be possible to carry the same information within HTML5 
without imposing the cost on people who don't need it.

Could you clarify what precisely that cost is?

 > Are there extension points that could be used?
 > If the cost for non RDFa people is 0, then it gives the RDFa 
community space to demonstrate value with running code and deployed apps.
 >
 >
 > e.g. could these additional attributes be included in a script data 
block element?
 >
 > <script type="text/rdfa">
 >  about="http://example.org"
 >  datatype="xsd:int"
 > </script>

Are you suggesting that only putting the attributes on <script> somehow 
changes costs? How so?

 > ...

BR, Julian
Received on Saturday, 14 February 2009 09:23:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 14 February 2009 09:23:05 GMT