- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Mon, 25 Aug 2008 20:12:46 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>, Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, "Booth, David (HP Software - Boston)" <dbooth@hp.com>, "public-grddl-comments@w3.org" <public-grddl-comments@w3.org>
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, Julian Reschke wrote: > > > > I think that declaring metadata vocabularies is a bad idea regardless > > of the syntax. However, the <link rel=""> feature is explicitly > > intended as an extension point for people who want to do whatever they > > want to do, so > > So is head/@profile. No, <head profile> is intended to be an opaque identifier declaring that a vocabulary is in use. HTML4 doesn't justify dereferencing it for computer processing purposes, and doesn't even allow more than one URI. It's not an extension point, it has a defined meaning. > > from an HTML5 perspective it's fine. The profile="" attribute is worse > > because it encourages other people to make the same design mistake, > > and it > > Which design mistake? The one I immediately described: > > misleads people into thinking that they have to declare their vocabularies, > > and it misleads people into thinking that other people will declare their > > vocabularies. > > I think it's a good design to declare a vocabulary. I understand that you think that. > > > Yes, that would be true, but you'd have to explicitly add it to your > > > list of GRDDL transformations. Which is also work. > > > > It's work you will have to do anyway, since not all microChemistry > > users will label their documents as using microChemistry. > > How do you know that? Users have not used profile="" for any of the other vocabularies on any sort of consistent basis, so there's no reason to think they'd do anything different for new vocabularies. > > It's also only work for the GRDDL users who care about microChemistry, > > which is likely less than the number of microChemistry users. > > > > > So, for agents when encountering a profile that has a transformation > > > that is not locally cached, they could "dynamically" run the GRDDL > > > tranformation by going to the profile page. > > > > Only if the profile page declares the GRDDL transformation, which is > > unlikely in practice. > > Why is that unlikely? Based on the existing profiles, it hardly ever happens. It seems reasonable to extrapolate that this will continue to not happen much. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 25 August 2008 20:13:05 UTC