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

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

From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2009 19:32:11 +0100
To: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Cc: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20091210193211053629.b1286ab0@xn--mlform-iua.no>
Ian Hickson, Thu, 10 Dec 2009 17:17:10 +0000 (UTC):
> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
>> Ian Hickson, Thu, 10 Dec 2009 16:12:34 +0000 (UTC):
>>> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
>>>> Ian Hickson, Thu, 10 Dec 2009 14:41:03 +0000 (UTC):
>>>>> On Thu, 10 Dec 2009, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
>>>>>> But Microdata is *already* being designed by only a half or a third 
>>>>>> of the group, despite that it is placed inside the same spec. This 
>>>>>> split will be/is already reflected in the design.
>> There is no agreement within this group that we are working closely 
>> together on Microdata, which is what Conway's mandates in order avoid 
>> the effect of the law. Conway's law says that under such circumstances, 
>> things will not end up compatible. I don't think that Conway's law says 
>> that you will always - immediately - be able to pinpoint the 
>> incompatibilities.
> So in other words, despite you saying that the aforementioned split "will 
> be/is already reflected in the design", it is in fact not reflected, and 
> you cannot point to anything that you think will show such a split?

I don't bet that I am able to impact your conclusion. But we have 
already designed two meta data drafts: HTML+RDFa and microdata. The 
damage is done. What we should avoid is that we produce two versions of 
HTML as well: An ignored version that includes microdata, and a 
de-facto version that ignores microdata.

>> The current work on Microdata has not had wide support within this 
>> group. And perhaps even less outside this group. I can't see that this 
>> could worsen by being moved into another spec. And hence, Tab's premise 
>> is wrong.
> That's a complete non-sequitur. Tab's premise, and indeed Conway's law in 
> general, has nothing to do with how much support something has. It has to 
> do with technical design.

It has to with sociology. Sociology's impact on technical design.

It seems to me that Conway's law does not care about this or that 
design. It just observes that people that unite tend to design a united 
design. While people that do not unite tend to design a de-facto 
plurality. Support - as a wording for how much one is united around a 
task - thus impacts the design. 

Microdata and HTML 5 _can_ work nicely together. Wikipedia:

]] two software modules A and B cannot interface correctly with each 
other _unless_ the designer and implementer of A communicates with the 
designer and implementer of B. [[
leif halvard silli 
Received on Thursday, 10 December 2009 18:32:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:04 UTC