- From: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2011 11:47:54 -0500
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>, HTML Data Task Force WG <public-html-data-tf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAGR+nnG=ko=s++=LH2o_fzd02wmNX46uaVc6BgL9FB_wDvfzxw@mail.gmail.com>
Ivan, On Mon, Dec 19, 2011 at 6:45 AM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > <snip> Section 2.2.1.2: the reference to the RDFa 1.1 Core initial context is > wrong. It should say: http://www.w3.org/2011/rdfa-context/rdfa-1.1.html > > That's what Jeni had put in the document at the first place, but I asked her to change to http://www.w3.org/2011/rdfa-context/rdfa-1.1, based on the latest RDFa core draft [1] which references that URI (search for rdfa-context) and also your email at [2]. Did that change? Steph. [1] www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/drafts/2011/WD-rdfa-core-20111215/ [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Dec/0040.html > ---- > > Section 2.2.1.2: I would prefer not to mention @xmlns at all. In the > HTML5 version this may not even be allowed at all... > > (If you agree, then in the paragraph that follows: "last three" -> "last > two") > > ---- > > Section 2.2.1.3. This may be a rathole... but... 2.2.1.2 refers to IRI-s, > whereas this section uses URL. Is this intentional? Or can I use mailto: > ivan@w3.org as a property value in microdata (not that I would like to, > but you take the point...)? I know that there is a separate section on some > of the issues later, but the reader, getting to that point, might be > confused... > > ----- > > I am a little bit worried about the complexity of the 2.2.1.3 section. I > realize that this is the nature of the beast, because mixing vocabularies > in microdata is simply complicated, but it really breaks the flow of the > reading that the relevant rdfa and microformat sections are both 1-2 > paragraphs, whereas the microdata one goes on for pages. If a potential > author reads this for the first time, it is easy to be lost. > > Maybe putting that part into an appendix, and keeping the main text short, > essentially saying that this is complex in microdata, here are the main > lines of solving that, and see the appendix for the technical details? > > Also, it may be worth (in the appendix) adding the similar examples for > microformats and rdfa, too. In general, maybe some good comparative > sections in the appendix may be very helpful for newcomers... > > ----- > > For 2.2., it may be worth mentioning that a companion document, extracting > RDF from microdata, is also in the making, ie, such a processor would > interpret the microdata in turtle, too (show example?). I would expect, at > some points, processors coming up that would 'distill' both RDFa and > microdata from a document and merge that in RDF; I am sure Gregg will do > that, and I may do the same at some point when the microdata->RDF mapping > gels... > > ----- > > 2.2.4: "any property elements" -> "any property attribute" > > ----- > > 3.1.2.2. > > If JSON-LD is listed (which is fine!) then I think we should also list > Turtle. After all, both are syntaxes of the same data model... > > That is it for now... > > > > On Dec 11, 2011, at 18:22 , Jeni Tennison wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > I've pulled together much of the documentation from our wiki into a > single document, at: > > > > > https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/htmldata/raw-file/default/html-data-guide/index.html > > > > Please take the time to read this as it is the main product of this Task > Force, and raise any comments here. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Jeni > > -- > > Jeni Tennison > > http://www.jenitennison.com > > > > > > > ---- > Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead > Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > mobile: +31-641044153 > FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf > > > > > > >
Received on Monday, 19 December 2011 21:04:33 UTC