- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 11:19:16 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7542 Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|REOPENED |RESOLVED Resolution| |WONTFIX --- Comment #3 from Ian 'Hixie' Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> 2009-09-21 11:19:16 --- > Question: did you ask any of the people who submitted original use cases > whether microdata met their requirements? That's not a complicated question, > nor is it irrelevant. In fact it is exceptionally relevant. I already answered that — yes, the section was designed in consultation with a number of the people who put forward use cases. All the people with whom I discussed use cases indicated that it was satisfactory. Many more have since come forward and have even been using it, e.g.: http://dragnetslegacy.blogspot.com/ > When a query was made whether anyone liked the section, the few people who > responded affirmatively were all people who did not provide any use case, as > far as I could determine from the documentation you provided. > > Therefore, microdata did not meet the needs of the use case submitters, and > hence has no justification for continued inclusion in the specification. Your conclusion does not follow from your premise. Nobody has in fact put forward a use case that microdata fails to handle but which another solution (such as RDFa) does handle. In any case, if you wish this section to be removed from HTML5, please escalate this issue to the chairs. I do not agree with the premise of your argument for removing the section. -- Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email ------- You are receiving this mail because: ------- You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Monday, 21 September 2009 11:19:28 UTC