Re: Multiple itemtypes in microdata

On Wed, 19 Oct 2011 03:13:12 +0200, Gregg Kellogg  
<gregg@kellogg-assoc.com> wrote:

> On Oct 18, 2011, at 5:00 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 18 Oct 2011, Gregg Kellogg wrote:

>>> 1) bake in support for each vocabulary into a conformant processor
>>
>> This is the assumption that microdata is built around.
>
> Doesn't scale, and requires a processor revision for each new  
> vocabulary. Someone needs to act as a gate keeper. If the decision to  
> provide specific support is left up to each processor implementer, the  
> interpretation of the data becomes variable (and therefore useless). If  
> it's intended that each application do it's own processing from HTML, it  
> places a burden on application providers who would much rather leave the  
> semantic extraction to standardized tools IMO.

What does this mean? What interesting things could one possibly do without  
knowing the vocabulary? You can extract microdata into JSON without  
knowing the vocabulary and you can mix and transform that in any number of  
ways, but to actually do something useful that users would care about,  
surely you need to understand the data in order to add something of value?

-- 
Philip Jägenstedt
Core Developer
Opera Software

Received on Wednesday, 19 October 2011 09:19:21 UTC