- From: Toby A Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 09:44:48 +0100
- To: public-html@w3.org
Henri Sivonen wrote: > It's interesting to see what preferences (i.e. unresolved arguments) > the tool offers. As author of said tool, I thought I'd weigh in. > Only Strict eRDF is checked by default. "Strict Microformats" and > "Strict GRDDL" mean that the tool forces itself to not recognize class > and rel values if there's no profile URI. Since these are not checked > by default, the developer of the tool has to have concluded that it's > more useful for users of the tool to ignore the profile URI. Don't read too much into that. Consider it an application of Postel's law - being liberal in what I accept from others. The eRDF strictness option is on by default because applying eRDF parsing to pages which haven't been authored with eRDF in mind tends to generate junk. With the strict option enabled, it won't parse eRDF unless it sees the eRDF profile - i.e. the author has opted in. > Also note that actually dereferencing profile URIs for GRDDL discovery > is off by default because it is slow with two exclamation points. For the majority of pages in the wild, Cognition does not need GRDDL. It has built-in support for hCard, hCalendar, XFN and a bunch of other microformats, including experimental support for a number of drafts from the microformats Wiki. If you enable GRDDL and your page provides GRDDL profiles for each microformat you use, then all the microformats on your page are parsed twice (the first time using reasonably fast built-in functions, and the second time using the slower GRDDL process) for no additional benefit. That's why it's off by default. However, if you use a "microformat"[1] that Cognition doesn't have built-in support for - say you've invented your own "hWine" format for marking up your bottle collection - then providing a GRDDL profile, and enabling GRDDL when parsing will allow your data to be parsed, and thereafter used in the same ways that Cognition would be able to use it if it did have built-in support. Overall, a method for pages to link to metadata profiles is needed by HTML. Whether it is head@profile or rel="profile" (or something else entirely) doesn't really matter as far as I'm concerned. That said, from what I can tell, the suggested change from head@profile to rel="profile" appears to be gratuitous "change for the sake of change". I don't see why HTML5 should break existing pages, specifications and tools that use head@profile. ____ 1. I include this term in quotation marks because here I'm mostly referring to formats developed outside the microformats.org community, but labelled "microformats" by their creators. Every time one of these is labelled a "microformat", Tantek turns in his whatever it is that people turn in when they haven't died. -- Toby A Inkster <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Friday, 5 September 2008 08:55:34 UTC