Re: The next HTML+RDFa Heartbeat

On 03/31/10 02:33, Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 7:32 PM, Manu Sporny <> wrote:
>> I would suggest that this Working Group makes it a point to have the
>> RDFa WG review the Microdata specification when it goes to LC.
>> Similarly, this WG should make it a point to ensure that WHATWG reviews
>> the RDFa Core 1.1, HTML+RDFa, and RDFa DOM API specification when it
>> goes to LC.
>> I can't imagine that the reviews are going to be overflowing with
>> praise, from either group, but it's the proper due diligence that should
>> be expected from any W3C Working Group.
> I can promise a review of the RDFa 1.1 spec.

Great, thanks in advance for your time, Tab. :)

Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> It seems to me that it is the RDFa WG's
> responsibility to seek cross-functional review of RDFa Core 1.1 and
> RDFa DOM API; I hope HTML WG is on the list of other WGs that should
> review.

Yes, that is correct - it is the responsibility of RDFa WG. HTML WG is
most definitely on the list of other WGs that should review the documents.

> And it is the HTML WG's responsibility to ensure cross-
> functional review of HTML+RDFa. RDFa WG will certainly be on the list
> for that.

Glad to hear it. I had assumed that was the case, but it's always good
to know that an assumption is valid.

-- manu

Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: PaySwarming Goes Open Source

Received on Wednesday, 31 March 2010 15:22:58 UTC