W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > April 2011

Re: Working Group Decision on ISSUE-120 rdfa-prefixes

From: Kurt Cagle <kurt.cagle@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 7 Apr 2011 21:17:16 -0400
Message-ID: <BANLkTi=pOONB1TZi2kZmwk2puYB=TL8P7A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>

You're correct regarding Wikipedia (my error). MediaWiki, on which Wikipedia
is built, does have support for RDFa, but it is disabled in Wikipedia.
FreeBase is not directly affiliated with Wikipedia (though it uses a great
deal of its content), while DBPedia does in fact have a formal affiliation
and is seen as part of the Wikipedia community.

By the way, Time, Inc. announced recently that they are looking for a
managing semanticist to manage a team to RDFa-ify Time's properties.


On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 6:11 PM, Aryeh Gregor <Simetrical+w3c@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Thu, Apr 7, 2011 at 5:58 PM, Kurt Cagle <kurt.cagle@gmail.com> wrote:
> > 2) Google produces RDFa output in a number of different contexts, and in
> > general does it right. This is also true of Wikipedia (and its associated
> > Freebase and DBPedia systems)
> Where does Wikipedia produce RDFa content?  Freebase and DBPedia are
> both unrelated to Wikipedia, except that they use Wikipedia content.
> Of course, anyone can use Wikipedia content, since it's freely
> licensed, so that doesn't make them affiliated with Wikipedia.
Received on Friday, 8 April 2011 01:18:16 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Saturday, 9 October 2021 18:45:36 UTC