Re: proliferation of reference roles in the dpub aria spec.

On Tue, 13 Oct 2015 14:41:13 +0200, Steve Faulkner  
<> wrote:

> On 13 October 2015 at 13:37, Siegman, Tzviya - Hoboken  
> <> wrote:
>> The one thing that does concern us is that it is a little unclear who  
>> “owns” the rel registry and how specifically terms are defined.
> looping in tantek as he is microformat in person

Apparently Rohit Khare owns the domain name.

In any event, the wiki has been maintained for a decade, by all  
appearances as well as assurances in good faith in the public interest.

Terms are defined by third parties - some are defined through the  
"microformats" process, some are defined by specs like HTML 4 or HTML 5,  
and some are defined by proposals included in the wiki itself.

It seems that if people wanted to produce an extension specification for  
HTML, adding some values, that would be a reasonable way to make the  
specification, and that they should also be noted on the wiki itself.

As far as I can tell, they are really "ratified" by "reality check" more  
than some formal committee-type process - if they are used by some set of  
audience and producers, they are real.

Which seems reasonable. We could create a spec to describe the values  
people are looking for which are missing, like "biblioref" and if people  
use them, they become real. And for the things that are already there -  
help, next, glossary, start/home, etc, we just point people to the  
existing specifications and standards and ask them to implement those as  


Charles McCathie Nevile - web standards - CTO Office, Yandex - - - Find more at

Received on Wednesday, 14 October 2015 00:07:19 UTC