- From: Edward O'Connor <hober0@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 1 Aug 2008 11:56:38 -0700
- To: "HTML WG" <public-html@w3.org>
[Regarding trackback's use of RDF-in-comments, contrasting with pingback's use of link@rel] >>> Could you clarify what extension points you're talking about? Class? >> >> Offhand, @class, @rel, @id, <div>, <span>, <meta>, @data-* all come >> to mind. I suppose @role counts, though why you'd use @role instead >> of @class eludes me. > > To put in RDF statements? No, to include a trackback link in an HTML document. All you need is @rel for this case. > rel could work for this particular case (it would work better if there > was a registry mechanism). There is one, in Section 5.11.3.20 Other link types: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#other0 > div/span: don't see where there's extensibility in them. Lacking semantics of their own, <div> and <span> are handy to when other elements' semantics would conflict with whichever semantics you're adding to things. For instance, prior to the introduction of <article>, authors could have used <div> (as in <div class="article">) for marking up articles. > That being said, it [@data-*] has the same problem as most of the > other things you mentioned, the lack of a disambiguation mechanism. So far as I've seen, the lack of a disambiguation mechanism isn't a problem in practice. <div class="vcard"> means what it obviously means, regardless of the presence or contents of head@profile.
Received on Friday, 1 August 2008 18:57:13 UTC