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

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

From: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Dec 2009 01:36:45 +0100
To: "Maciej Stachowiak" <mjs@apple.com>, "James Graham" <jgraham@opera.com>
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: <op.u4d1bjt8sr6mfa@sisko>
On Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:19:43 +0100, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>  
wrote:

>
> 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?

It is very clear that the HTML WG is unable to collectively decide which  
is better, simply because of ideological divides, prestige, etc. I doubt  
however that there are very many (any?) individuals who see the two as  
equally good choices. If that were the actual case I agree with Tab that  
the choice does not matter. This is a purely theoretical situation and not  
the one we are in.

Refusing to pick and taking both technologies to REC can only be seen as a  
failure of the HTML WG. Ultimately this will either have to be settled by  
a vote, a chair decision or a combination. This has been obvious for a  
very long time.

-- 
Philip Jägenstedt
Received on Friday, 4 December 2009 00:37:29 UTC

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