W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > December 2009

Re: ISSUE-76: Need feedback on splitting Microdata into separate specification

From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
Date: Thu, 03 Dec 2009 15:19:43 -0800
Cc: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Message-id: <AD73275F-21E7-4A17-8261-FF3E0A80D653@apple.com>
To: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>

On Dec 3, 2009, at 12:21 PM, James Graham wrote:

>
> On the other hand I accept that in some cases other considerations  
> might be more important than how usable the spec is for me. In the  
> specific case of microdata however many of the arguments presented  
> for splitting the spec seem to boil down to it being "unfair" to  
> have microdata in the main spec and RDFa outside it. I don't think  
> arguments based on perceived fairness are valid technical arguments  
> and as such I don't think they should be given much weight.
>

Question for James and Tab (and whoever else thinks Microdata should  
be in because it's a good technology and better than RDFa):

Let's set aside for the moment your view that Microdata is a better  
technical solution than RDFa. Let's assume that we were unable to  
decide which of RDFa or Microdata is better, and for whatever reason  
it's not possible to make a technology with all of the advantages and  
none of the disadvantages of both. Let's also stipulate that we think  
the use cases they address are worth addressing. In that case, what  
would be the right course of action for the Working Group? Include  
both in the main spec? Include neither? Something else?

Regards,
Maciej
Received on Thursday, 3 December 2009 23:20:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:54 UTC