- From: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
- Date: Sat, 23 Aug 2008 13:42:58 -0700
- To: Kristof Zelechovski <giecrilj@stegny.2a.pl>
- CC: 'Julian Reschke' <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, 'Ian Hickson' <ian@hixie.ch>, "'Bonner, Matt'" <matt.bonner@hp.com>, 'Dan Brickley' <danbri@danbri.org>, "'Tab Atkins Jr.'" <jackalmage@gmail.com>, 'Henri Sivonen' <hsivonen@iki.fi>, www-archive@w3.org, WHAT-WG <whatwg@whatwg.org>
[I've been asked to bring this back to the WHATWG list, so I'm doing so now. For folks who want to look at the beginning of this thread on www-archive, it begins here: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2008Aug/0024.html ] Kristof Zelechovski wrote: > Forcing metadata into content is an incompatible modification. So, that would squarely contradict Ian's point that we can "already ado this with existing HTML extensibility." But let's dig in for a second. Incompatible with what? What principle of HTML or existing feature of HTML would be broken by adding metadata into content? (Not to mention that Julian is right, the distinction between metadata and data is often irrelevant.) Also, does that mean microformats go against the principle of HTML? After all, they include calendar event markup in the HTML body. -Ben
Received on Saturday, 23 August 2008 20:43:42 UTC