On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 12:10 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: > Shelley Powers wrote: > >> >> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 10:17 AM, Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com<mailto: >> annevk@opera.com>> wrote: >> >> On Thu, 28 May 2009 15:18:11 +0200, Shelley Powers >> <shelley.just@gmail.com <mailto:shelley.just@gmail.com>> wrote: >> > In fact, that's my biggest concern: that discussions should occur >> > directly between RDFa and HTML5 folks are not happening, >> happening offline, or >> > snarkily, in IRC ( >> > >> >> http://lastweekinhtml5.blogspot.com/2009/05/rdfa-guys-wake-up-and-smell-pilgrims.html >> ). >> >> What do you mean? At least Sam Ruby and Philip Taylor are debating >> the technical issues with the RDFa crowd right on this mailing list. >> >> I meant exactly what I said: it would have been helpful to have folks who >> have implemented RDFa libraries in JS participating, because they will have >> the best understanding of the issues. That's not a condemnation of the >> folks, just an observation that the discussion isn't as inclusive as it need >> be. >> > > The most I can do is make *this* place hospitable. If there are issues > that are preventing others from participating here, I ask that Chris and I > be informed as to what these issues (either on-list or off-list) are and I > am committed to resolving them. > > I hope that the folks that have implemented RDFa libraries in JS do chose > to participate when they are ready. > > - Sam Ruby > > Actually Sam, these emails are cross posting between RDFa in XHTML TF and the HTML WG. My wistful hope was directed more as a hint to the folks on the RDFa side. I can understand if they choose not to participate. I'll be disappointed, but I can understand. My other comments were directed more at the HTML WG et al side, but saying them will solve nothing. People will act directly, and positively, or they won't. Shelley
Received on Thursday, 28 May 2009 17:27:57 UTC