- From: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 11:19:06 +0200
- To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Kurt Cagle <kurt.cagle@gmail.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>, www-archive@w3.org, public-rdfa@w3.org
On 11 April 2011 08:29, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote: > On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 12:13 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote: >> Absolutely. If Facebook doesn't do it right, let's raise bug reports. > > Considering that the usual name droppees (Facebook, Yahoo! and Google) > all failed to get it right, I suggest raising the bugs on RDFa itself > for poor implementability. Did Yahoo! get it wrong? I'd be surprised, they've got a good history in this area. Whatever, I suspect the limited implementations by Facebook and Google at least reveal more about the culture of those companies than the implementability of the spec. Looking at: http://rdfa.info/wiki/Consume - there's a good selection of libraries for the various programming languages, which presumably are based on the specs rather than any proprietary application requirements. Building any tool from scratch seems a perverse choice these days... implementability of low-level support for any spec shouldn't really be an issue. But what I believe the RDFa folks should do is highlight the open source libs with good spec conformance (and commercial-suitable licenses) to help avoid future Facebooks and Googles falling into the NIH trap. Cheers, Danny. -- http://danny.ayers.name
Received on Monday, 11 April 2011 09:21:48 UTC