W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-admin@w3.org > January 2013

[Bug 20719] New: Make the example more enlightening - explain more and perhaps add a second example

From: <bugzilla@jessica.w3.org>
Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2013 23:10:18 +0000
To: public-html-admin@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-20719-2495@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>

            Bug ID: 20719
           Summary: Make the example more enlightening - explain more and
                    perhaps add a second example
    Classification: Unclassified
           Product: HTML WG
           Version: unspecified
          Hardware: PC
               URL: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-in-html/#d
                OS: All
            Status: NEW
          Severity: normal
          Priority: P2
         Component: HTML+RDFa (editor: Manu Sporny)
          Assignee: msporny@digitalbazaar.com
          Reporter: xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no
        QA Contact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
                CC: mike@w3.org, msporny@digitalbazaar.com,

I came to look at this spec tonight because I was searching for an RDFa
template and/or an RDFa lite template for to add to a text editor. Both XHTML
and HTML format could be interesting.

But when I find the example document in this document, I was not helped at all.
In fact, it was quite confusing that it  (with the fix form bug 20717) is just
a normal HTML5 document — witthout any RDFa "bells or whistles".

Because, what does it mean? Does it mean that there is RDF hidden in "normal"
HTML documents without any explicit RDFa inside? Or does it simply mean that
you want to show how simple RDFA is - or?

If the point is that there is RDFa hidden in normall HTML5, then you should
tell us a) that that it is how it is and b) why it is so (e.g. is it because of
the default vocabulary?)


Regardless, you should perhaps "beef up" the example document. Or perhaps
rather add a second example. (Or may be my expectations are wrong - I thought
that one would add RDFa attributes on inside the <html > tag or in the <head >

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Received on Sunday, 20 January 2013 23:10:19 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:57:21 UTC