- From: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 16 Oct 2009 12:14:59 -0500
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Cc: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>, public-html@w3.org
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 11:50 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > James Graham wrote: >> >> One point that has not, as far as I can tell, thus far been raised in >> favour of keeping Microdata in the spec: Hixie has previously reported that >> the amount of feedback on sections that have been removed has dropped >> compared to when they were in the main spec (sorry I only remember this from >> IRC and don't have a reference handy). So keeping microdata in the main spec >> ensures that it receives the greatest possible amount of input from people >> interested in HTML5 but unaware of all the history behind what is in >> different documents. Such people exist for sure because they regularly >> appear on IRC asking why X is missing from HTML5, where X is a feature that >> has been spun off into a different spec. Having microdata in the HTML5 spec >> for Last Call in particular will ensure that the attention and wide review >> that happens during the this period also focuses attention on microdata, >> thus helping to improve the technology. > > That sounds like an argument to add RDFa to the main spec then. Well, we *do* have the "complete" spec view now... ~TJ
Received on Friday, 16 October 2009 17:15:47 UTC