- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2011 12:02:09 -0500
- To: public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
I also like Structured Data API. +1 On 6/1/2011 11:55 AM, Thomas Steiner wrote: >> I do not think so. The API does not necessarily handle Mark-up data only; the parser may get into the store RDF/XML data (yes, those still exist:-) via HTTP, bypassing any markup in a web page... > Fair enough. +1 then for Structured Data API! > >> Ivan >> >> >>> --Tom >>> >>> Thank God not sent from a BlackBerry, but from my iPhone >>> >>> On 01.06.2011, at 15:50, Ivan Herman<ivan@w3.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Just musing... Discussing with some colleagues I was wondering whether the term 'RDF API' is really the good one, and whether we should not use some more general and not-necessarily-RDF name instead. After all, our idea is that the parser underneath should be able to get microdata or microformats into the triple store, too, but that also mean that the projection interface& friends are not RDF only. What about something like 'Structured Data API'? >>>> >>>> Just an idea... >>>> >>>> I. >>>> >>>> ---- >>>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead >>>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >>>> mobile: +31-641044153 >>>> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html >>>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >> >> ---- >> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead >> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >> mobile: +31-641044153 >> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html >> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf >> >> >> >> >> -- Shane McCarron Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc. +1 763 786 8160 x120
Received on Wednesday, 1 June 2011 17:02:37 UTC