W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > February 2010

[Bug 9001] New: Consistent "Status" sections for Microdata and RDFa

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Mon, 15 Feb 2010 11:34:16 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-ID: <bug-9001-2486@http.www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/>

           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

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

    * 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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:01:11 UTC