- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Fri, 4 Dec 2009 19:59:42 +0100
- To: Tim van Oostrom <tim@depulz.nl>
- Cc: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Tim van Oostrom, Fri, 04 Dec 2009 10:38:07 +0100: > Leif Halvard Silli wrote: >> Philip Jägenstedt, Fri, 04 Dec 2009 01:36:45 +0100: >>> On Fri, 04 Dec 2009 00:19:43 +0100, Maciej Stachowiak: >>>> On Dec 3, 2009, at 12:21 PM, James Graham wrote: >>>> >>> I doubt however that there are very many (any?) individuals who see >>> the two as equally good choices. >> >> RDFa is mature and implemented. Even if microdata technically was as >> good as RDFa, it wouldn't automatically be a equally good choice. >> > It all depends on the context. But if the w3c wants the 'web of > linked data' to succeed at a faster pace they should go for a simple > technology which is part of a primary spec such as HTML5. > I'd rather use simple, less time consuming, technology than complex, > more time consuming, technology. Designers,Developers,Webmasters and > teachers will probably make that same choice. > > The success of linked-data is all about widespread usage of annotated > data in projects authored by *people of all skill-levels*. If you > think about that, which technology suits best ? That's a hypothetical question which would require lots of effort to answer. A legitimate question _now_ is why W3C should sanction yet another way to do the same thing - who would that help? Thus we should at least not put it in the spec. I don't think it is hypothetical that some probably find microdata and RDFa roughly equally good _technology_. However, in the situation we are, then microdata needs to be technically better than RDFa in order to be a equally good _choice_. And _much_ better in order to be a better choice. But even if we could agree that it is much better, it would still be a question whether it should be in the spec. -- leif halvard silli
Received on Friday, 4 December 2009 19:00:24 UTC