- From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 11:34:16 +0000
- To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9001 Summary: Consistent "Status" sections for Microdata and RDFa Product: HTML WG Version: unspecified Platform: PC OS/Version: Windows NT Status: NEW Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: HTML5 spec bugs AssignedTo: dave.null@w3.org ReportedBy: julian.reschke@gmx.de QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org CC: ian@hixie.ch, mike@w3.org, public-html@w3.org Raising this against HTML5 spec for now as recommended by Sam Ruby (http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2010Feb/0411.html). The Status sections for RDFa-in-HTML and Microdata should be clear about the status in the WG, and their relation with respect to the HTML5 spec. I propose to use something similar to what the RDFa editor's draft has: "The publication of this document by the W3C as a W3C Working Draft does not imply endorsement by the W3C HTML Working Group or the W3C as a whole. In particular, * There are one or more alternate methods of adding data without using RDFa, such as [microdata]. * There are discussions of alternate extensibility mechanisms, covered in [issue-41], which might allow other ways of integrating RDFa. * There is concern that continued development of this document belongs in a different working group." That being said, other wording would be ok as well, as long as it's consistent in both specs. -- 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, 15 February 2010 11:34:17 UTC