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

[Bug 9010] There are one or more alternate methods of adding data without using RDFa, such as [microdata].

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Tue, 16 Feb 2010 23:10:05 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1NhWYP-0007De-36@wiggum.w3.org>
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9010





--- Comment #4 from Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>  2010-02-16 23:10:04 ---
(In reply to comment #3)
> This bug is here to ensure that Larry's feedback about the SotD for HTML+RDFa
> is preserved and displayed to the reader of the HTML+RDFa spec.

The goal of bugs is not "preserv[ing] and display[ing] feedback", it's
recording problems with a draft and resulting requests to change it.

> 
> There are two possible things that I can see that would clear this bug:
> 
> 1. The HTML WG commits to publishing HTML+RDFa as a REC by changing its
> charter.
> 2. The HTML WG defers development and publishing HTML+RDFa as a REC to the RDFa
> WG, which would have to change its charter.
> 3. Some combination of #1 and #2.
> 
> There may be other ways to clear this bug, but if not, the two items above seem
> actionable to me. Thoughts?
> 

How would any of these actions prevent there being "one or more alternate
methods of adding data without using RDFa"? If seems like if we did those
things, it would have absolutely no effect on whether there are alternate
methods.

I can't see any change that would remove that concern other than deleting RDFA,
or deleting Microdata (but the latter would be a bug on Microdata, not on
RDFa).


-- 
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 Tuesday, 16 February 2010 23:10:06 UTC

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