Re: Decentralised extensibility idea (ISSUE-41)

Philip Jägenstedt, Fri, 15 Jan 2010 18:05:09 +0100:
> On Fri, 15 Jan 2010 17:13:43 +0100, Toby Inkster <> wrote:
>> Philip Jägenstedt wrote:
>>> I don't think this is a very good idea, as data-* are always hidden
>>> and not suitable for marking up content that is visible in the page.
>> You are mistaking my proposal for a method of embedding data into a
>> document. The proposal is not intended for embedding the kind of data
>> that Microdata or RDFa embed; rather it's a general purpose extension
>> point that other standards ("otherspecs") could use.
> Yes, I did assume as much from the examples, but in fact I think they 
> are effectively the same thing.

Same thing? How?
> Only user agents can change the behavior of any element/attribute in 
> other ways than what is already possible using JavaScript and CSS. If 
> you are a user agent (especially a browser) then I would argue that 
> you *shouldn't* be making stuff up, you should make a 
> proof-of-concept and then propose the feature for standardization as 
> a proper HTML feature. Centralization here is a good thing, because 
> it makes vendors talk to each other and improve the feature before it 
> is too late.
> If, on the other hand, you are not a user agent, then the only thing 
> you can do is embed data and make any behavior/rendering with 
> JavaScript/CSS. For embedding the data/hooks you need you can use 
> data-* attributes, clasa attributes, microdata or whatever you want.

Jonas has meant that D.E. could be handled by MD. As such, it would be 
possible to (mis)use MD as a "general purpose extension". By your logic 
then, we should not have MD, as it allows non-UA vendors to "avoid" the 
W3 centralisation.

It seems like the WG needs to decide whether at all there should be any 
way for non-UA vendors to decide/define how HTML should interpreted ... 
? Aren't you simply not in tune with the charter here?

Authors can use "data-* attributes, clasa attributes, microdata or 
whatever you want" - but not @profile? Give me a break. A powerful 
vendor like Google already use data-* for their "SVG-via-Flash" 
solution. It is just naïve to not realize that they are effectively 
defining a profile?
leif halvard silli

Received on Friday, 15 January 2010 17:52:32 UTC