W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > January 2010

Re: HTML+RDFa Heartbeat Draft publishing request

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 11:08:30 +0100
Message-ID: <4B4D9B9E.2060901@gmx.de>
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
CC: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>
Larry Masinter wrote:
>> Feedback on the current draft would be appreciated:
>> http://html5.digitalbazaar.com/specs/rdfa.html 
> Alas, this specification also fails to fit within the 
> charter of the HTML working group also.
> While it does supply a mechanism to permit
> RDFa to be mixed into HTML documents, thus actually
> addressing *one* of the examples given, the charter
> encourages *a* mechanism for mixing independently
> developed vocabularies.
> (For those who need clarification: in English, the use
> of the indefinite article "a" in "a mechanism, indicates
> the singular: one, not "one or more" not "several" not
> "one for each".)
> The HTML+RDFa doesn't address how to mix any other
> independently developed vocabulary into HTML documents --
> not any of the other two examples given in the charter,
> (ITS and Ruby) nor any others.
> Do you think it is possible to use the method proposed
> here for RDF to apply to any other vocabulary?
> Could the Microdata vocabulary be put into a namespace
> and then used through this extensibility mechanism?

I agree with Larry -- the charter *clearly* doesn't ask for RDFa or 
(similar extensions) to be added, but for an extension mechanism that 
allows to add those.

"The HTML WG is encouraged to provide a mechanism to permit 
independently developed vocabularies such as Internationalization Tag 
Set (ITS), Ruby, and RDFa to be mixed into HTML documents. Whether this 
occurs through the extensibility mechanism of XML, whether it is also 
allowed in the classic HTML serialization, and whether it uses the DTD 
and Schema modularization techniques, is for the HTML WG to determine."

And no, this isn't *twisting* the charter (-> 
<http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/whatwg/20100113#l-552>), it's *reading* it.

That being said, I'd like the W3C to work on metadata extensions for 
HTML, and do not care particularly where it happens. We already 
published RDFa-in-HTML, so I wouldn't object to Microdata as well, as 
long as it remains clear that it has exactly the same status with 
respect to document validity.

Best regards, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 13 January 2010 10:09:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:07 UTC