- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Dec 2009 11:09:07 -0500
- To: public-html@w3.org
Shelley Powers wrote: > I agree that combing two separate actions into one change proposal is > a mistake. I'm disappointed that the action of removing Microdata from > the HTML5 spec have now been tied into automatically publishing > Microdata as FPWD. What do you think about an additional straw poll option for those that agree with the split, but disagree with publishing HTML+Microdata as FPWD? > I'm keeping in mind, though, that just because a > document is published as FPWD doesn't mean it progresses. If no one > steps forward to support the draft, it will eventually end up as a > note. So, here the basic premises that led to the inclusion of automatically publishing HTML+Microdata as FPWD: - A non-trivial amount of work and discussion has been expended on developing Microdata. - There are at least 3 supporters of Microdata as well as spec text that is stabilizing. - The Microdata spec meets all FPWD requirements. - A number of individuals don't like RDFa (for a variety of reasons) and want a workable alternative. There are several outcomes that may occur if Microdata is split from HTML5. 1. The spec is dropped entirely because it is not a problem nor a solution that the editor nor the community wants to continue to promote. 2. The spec continues to be worked on, and thus will inevitably be published as a FPWD. I think #1 is unlikely, or rather, it would be very strange if Microdata ceased to be worked on just because it was split from the HTML5 specification. I think #2 is more likely, and in order for the work to continue, the publishing of the HTML+Microdata FPWD is inevitable. > I hope, though, that we don't get into the habit of littering this > group's steps with the bodies of numerous FPWD that end up becoming > notes. Our task should be to remove confusion, not add to it. To > simplify, not clutter. I agree. Keep in mind that we're only talking about Microdata, not a general habit of automatically publishing FPWDs whenever something is split from the HTML5 spec - that would, IMHO, be a very bad habit to pick up. The reason automatic FPWD is being considered is due to the specific circumstances surrounding HTML+Microdata and not because this should be a general rule. -- manu -- Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny) President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: Bitmunk 3.2 Launched - The Legal P2P Music Network http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2009/11/30/bitmunk-3-2-launched/
Received on Wednesday, 9 December 2009 16:09:41 UTC