- From: Leif Halvard Silli <lhs@malform.no>
- Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 03:00:15 +0200
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- CC: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>, RDFa Community <public-rdfa@w3.org>, "public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf.w3.org" <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Sam Ruby On 09-05-14 20.01: > Shane McCarron wrote: >> Folks, >> >> Thanks to you all for encouraging me to create a draft profile for >> RDFa in HTML 4. This document has no official standing of course - >> it is just something we at ApTest have been using for a while as a >> way of pushing metadata into traditional web sites and user agents. >> >> You can find the latest version at >> http://www3.aptest.com/standards/rdfa-html/ >> >> Feel free to send comments to me directly or to the >> public-rdfa@w3.org list if you want to share them with the >> community. I look forward to seeing what you think! > > A promising start! And a powerful demonstration of the usefulness of DTDs, @profile and profiles. Also known as modularization. Or "the hubris of 1998", as some call it [1]. ;-) Slowly, I have gathered that, from authors' point of view, profiles and DTDs /lead/ - they are far from as pointless as is often claimed in this WG (because the focus is so narrowly on UAs). For example, earlier this year Steve wanted to validate ARIA in HTML 4, and he had to turn to a off-line DTD [2] (that has since also found its way into an authoring tool [3]). The "HTML 4.0.1 plus" experiment [4] is also DTD based and can therefore be validated as well. As can "HTML 4+RDFa" documents. And these many, new HTML 4.0.1. dialects hints that DTDs, profiles and modularisation are quite helpful as a framework for specification writers as well. (Will HTML 5 completely eliminate the need for "private" HTML specs? If not, how should one go about if one needed to validate something - such as ARIA - that is (currently) officially unsupported in HTML 5?) Perhaps the XHTML 2 working group should concentrate on updating HTML 401 with support for ARIA, RDFa etc? After all, HTML 4 is their responsibility. From the reactions to this RDFa in HTML 4 draft, it seems like updating HTML 4.0.1 would be one of the best things that the XHTML 2 WG could do in order to help the HTML 5 development in the right direction. [1] http://intertwingly.net/blog/2009/05/14/RDFa-in-HTML [2] http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/?p=107 [3] http://www.paciellogroup.com/blog/?p=108 [4] http://buzzword.org.uk/2008/html4plus-example -- leif halvard silli
Received on Friday, 15 May 2009 01:00:58 UTC