W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > July 2011

Re: RDF Web Applications WG Position on RDFa/Microdata Task Force

From: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2011 08:38:09 -0400
Message-ID: <CAE1ny+7jgKb3OhmEJLj0gTJbMMVcaggWrBzRnHKY1Wkpc91iKg@mail.gmail.com>
To: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>
Cc: W3C TAG <www-tag@w3.org>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
On Tue, Jul 12, 2011 at 6:20 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com> wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2011 16:31:44 +0200, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> CONCERN: Multiple specifications for the same task
>>
>> During the TAG discussion, Larry Masinter produced a question that is at
>> the heart of the issue. "Does anyone want there to be more than one
>> structured data syntax published by W3C that accomplishes the same task?"
>>
>> In hindsight, it was a mistake for the HTML WG to allow the publication
>> of two specifications that accomplish effectively the same task (from
>> the viewpoint of the public). It is natural that nobody wanted to block
>> the work of others - but since that hard decision was not made, and
>> since some very large companies are attempting to make that decision for
>> their customers, it is creating a great deal of confusion in the
>> marketplace.
>>
>> We recommend that the question that Larry asked is required to be
>> answered by the Task Force.
>
> You seem to assume a certain answer to the question here given that you
> expect the task force to change the status quo ('Consensus on "No Change"').
> I do not think that makes sense. Was it a problem that both XML Schema and
> Relax NG existed? XForms and HTML Forms? XPath and Selectors? Sure enough in
> all these cases (and others like them) some people thought there was a
> problem, but in practice it turned out fine.
>

There is a difference between technologies aimed at experts (say XML
Schema and Relax NG) and technologies aimed at webmasters (say HTML
and XHTML2). Obviously, the market will in the final instance decide,
but ultimately it is better probably to have a single way IMHO, as
long as that way is fully baked and supported by industry.

Right now if I'm a webmaster and I want to put structured data in my
web-page to mark up my address, I have three incompatible ways of
doing so. Yahoo! Searchmonkey supported them all, and I believe at
least at Yahoo! they would find users would complain and get confused
about which one to use. I believe the same is true with Google Rich
Snippets. It might be useful to add Peter Mika and Kavi Goel to this
thread - they are likely not aware of the Task Force recommendation.


>
> --
> Anne van Kesteren
> http://annevankesteren.nl/
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 12 July 2011 12:38:39 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:39 GMT