- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 19 Feb 2010 21:36:16 +0100
- To: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
Hi, First of all: apologies for the late response to the call for a change proposal for ISSUE-55. The last update for ISSUE-55 was the following proposed specification: http://html5.digitalbazaar.com/specs/html5-epb.html As you know, most WG members have been very busy the previous week; in particular Manu who has been working on getting the RDFa WG up and running. At this point, Manu, Tantek, and I do not propose to apply a change to HTML5 itself. ISSUE-55 can be closed by amicable resolution. In the interest of transparency and better communication, we think the following is a better path forward and want to give a heads up in case there are others with similar interests (or skepticisms). We are now discussing a separate extension specification, with a relation to HTML5 similar to RDFa-in-HTML and Microdata. This proposed specification will be composed of three main sections: 1) A normative section, introducing the profile attribute on all elements in HTML5. 2) An informative section, listing known HTML 4.01 errata regarding the profile attribute on the head element 3) An informative section, describing how this specification could be applied to both previous versions of HTML and XHTML, and other markup languages. At present there are three supporters of this approach: Tantek, Manu and myself. We consider the generalization of the profile attribute to all elements to be new information and outside the scope of ISSUE-55. The proposal also parallels some discussion that has happened in the RDFa and microformats communities during the past two years. Namely, allowing the profile attribute to exist on all elements as a method for scoping the inclusion and definition of vocabularies. The draft will be collaboratively and transparently edited at the following location: http://microformats.org/wiki/html5-profile We hope that a FPWD-ready specification should be complete at the end of March, but will only propose a FPWD at that time if we feel that the work is ready. Best regards, Julian (assisted by Manu and Tantek)
Received on Friday, 19 February 2010 20:43:47 UTC