- From: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>
- Date: Wed, 14 Oct 2009 13:35:18 -0500
- To: public-html@w3.org
> Jonas Sicking wrote: > > ... > > Because IMHO they are an integral part of the HTML language. XHR for > > example is almost entirely language independent. There's certainly > > features that I'd like to see broken out of HTML5, such as the Window > > object, but given that microdata introduces new markup, I think > > breaking that out would be much more awkward. Another couple of > > The same can be said about RDFa. > > Unless the WG is prepared to decide on RDFa *or* Microdata, both > extensions should get the same treatment. > Actually, HTML+RDFa should continue on, as is. I think that Manu and others involved in writing the document made a responsible decision to publish the document separately. This prevents cluttering up an already overly large, overly complex HTML5 specification. It also, as Manu stated, allows for HTML+RDFa to progress at its own pace, to achieve a maturity and acceptance on its own. The authors of HTML+RDFa have enough faith in the specification that they don't feel it _has_ to be contained in the HTML5 document, in order to achieve success and acceptance. I would think that Microdata supporters would feel the same. > > ... > > BR, Julian Shelley
Received on Wednesday, 14 October 2009 18:35:56 UTC