- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 10:23:36 +0200
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- CC: "public-html@w3.org WG" <public-html@w3.org>
Julian Reschke wrote: > ... > Yes, > > but the hCard microformat isn't defined in the HTML spec. > > So, my issues are: > > Procedural - the WG is working on trying to find consensus on all > sections of the spec; sections without consensus are to be removed (at > least that's my understanding of the process). Also, the editor himself > announced a "feature freeze" quite some time ago. So, why are we seeing > these new sections without *any* prior discussion? > > Spec Size - the spec already is big, and there is no evidence that this > needs to be specified *inside* the HTML5 spec. > > Extensibility - the current chapter copies terminology from RFC2426, but > misses it's extensibility hooks, and thus fails to mention things that > have been defined later, such as the IMPP type name. > > Parsing - for some types, parsing rules are being rephrased from > RFC2426. There is a risk that they diverge. > > Versioning - the IETF is revising vCard, see > <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-vcarddav-vcardrev-07>. Is HTML5 > going to freeze the vocabulary at a version that the IETF is currently > obsoleting? > > So, I do agree that it's a good exercise to define how to expose vCard > data in RDFa and/or "microdata". But please do so in a separate > document, and without ignoring current IETF work. > > BR, Julian > ... I note there was no feedback on this. Does silence mean agreement here? In the meantime, the "spec" also contains instructions how to convert HTML to Atom, and a section about BibTeX (!). I have no problem with people trying to specify this *somewhere*, but I do have a big issue with this being done in HTML5. BR, Julian
Received on Friday, 22 May 2009 08:24:23 UTC