- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Sat, 1 Aug 2009 08:32:06 +0000 (UTC)
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, RDFa mailing list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
On Sat, 1 Aug 2009, Julian Reschke wrote: > Ian Hickson wrote: > > On Fri, 31 Jul 2009, Julian Reschke wrote: > > > That being said, MANY people deal just fine with prefix-based indirection, > > > and at least one indirection mechanisms we already have in HTML (class > > > names -> CSS) is *far* more complicated. > > > > Class names and CSS are also a source of great author confusion. > > So I guess we should something better for styling as well? Yes, that would be nice. If anyone has any suggestions that improve the authoring experience here without compromising on media-independence, device-independence, and accessibility, please do let me know. I haven't been able to find a better solution yet. > Yes, indirection mechanisms sometimes create confusion; but on the other > hand there are reasons to keep them. Painting things in black and white > when discussing them isn't helpful. The only reason to keep them that I know of in this case is the verbosity of URIs when you don't have them. That's why microdata doesn't require the use of URIs. I believe I listed requiring the use of URIs as another one of the problems. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Saturday, 1 August 2009 08:32:43 UTC