- From: Rob Sayre <rsayre@mozilla.com>
- Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 16:26:11 -0500
- To: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
On 3/1/09 4:12 PM, Smylers wrote: > The former is trampling over a feature designed for a different purpose; > Calling it trampling is a bit melodramatic. data- is ostensibly for private use. We know what happens with those (see X- headers). That said, I'm not aware of any X- headers with identical names and identical value grammars. > the latter is minting a brand new attribute that's all your own to play > with, which seems cleaner. > I wouldn't call anything about the RDFa design clean. If it ever gets popular, it looks to me like it will be another syntax masquerading as RDF that is produced and processed with lowbrow tools. The syntax is so brutal that those tools will get it wrong very often, but it won't matter, because no one will consume it with RDF tools either (see RSS1.0). >> However, unlike XMLNS, we could change the HTML5 text. >> > > Sure. But if we want to change the HTML 5 text to support RDFA, we can > simply do that by adding in RDFA-specific attributes. > I don't think you'll get consensus to do that, but you're welcome to try, of course. - Rob
Received on Sunday, 1 March 2009 21:26:54 UTC