- From: Elias Torres <elias@torrez.us>
- Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2007 15:00:22 -0400
- To: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com>
- CC: Bruce D'Arcus <bdarcus@gmail.com>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, W3C RDFa task force <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Mark Birbeck wrote: > Hi Bruce, > >> I've mentioned this here before, but more on RDF-in-OpenDocument. >> >> <http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/10/odf-enters-semantic-web.html> >> >> The OpenOffice project is now starting to looking into implementing it, >> so people here might be interested. > > I note that the attributes used in ODF are 'inspired' by RDFa [1]--but > why not just incorporate RDFa as is? First reason is because RDFa is still not finished, published, recommended etc. We are currently working on a XHTML 1.1 module and that I know of there's no work in progress for a recommendation on how to host RDFa in other XML languages. I understand that you have ideas/vision/plans, but just like every other standards group or task force, you can't depend on too many working drafts/vision/plan unless deadlines are of no concern. This is a very common practice at the W3C as well, so I hope that's enough for you to understand why we couldn't embed RDFa as is. Secondly, we are just getting to a point of good coverage of the issues that surround adding metadata to XHTML, but unfortunately, although you might see very little differences between XHTML and any other XML vocabulary, there's a lot of things to both work out and build from scratch in some XML vocabularies where something as basic as the document location/hyperlink not being defined as it's the case for ODF. I think we are too critical when we make these statements especially when I indicated many times in our calls that I was involved in this work and I didn't hear anyone volunteering to help. For example, several times I went as far as asking you personally for suggestions in some aspects of the RDFa spec before it was even brought up to the RDFa task force for sake of progress in the ODF metadata specification. Unfortunately, the task forces were working in parallel and it just wasn't feasible to combine both groups, learn each others requirements and deliver a single document. I wish things were as simple as me saying: hey guys let's use the RDFa spec from the W3C and put an OASIS/ODF rubber stamp on it and everyone just said: great, let's do that. > > It's especailly confusing for authors when this 'inpiration' seems to > involve copying some RDFa attributes, but changing the names of > others. For example, @about is used, but @datatype has been renamed to > @data-type! I would first hope that there's no a problem with us getting inspiration/copying the RDFa attributes. It was a long and arduous process to get where we are today. Bruce and I put in a LOT of time and patience until the group passed from storming to performing. Svante/Patrick put in an amazing effort with the documents (very similar to what you have done with the RDFa documents). We are now a happy/loving bunch and Bruce and I are grateful to our colleagues for putting up enough with us to the point that they now share our vision for metadata in office applications. It really took a lot of listening on their part for us to share everything we thought was great about the RDFa work. The ODF Metadata group was so much more welcoming to our perspective as opposed to other non-SW bred groups and us arguing about 'dash' felt to me disrespectful, if not rude. > > This lack of alignment is a shame, especially when the proponents of > ODF are generally critical of the confusion that can be caused by > companies and organisations pursuing alternate document formats. There > is a fantastic opportunity here for creating tools and search engines > that could leverage a 'standard' way of incorporating metadata into > HTML, XHTML, ODF, and other mark-up languages. That opportunity now > looks like it is going to be missed. I'm not as intimate with the ODF organization, but I would not confuse this sub-committee/task force with the rest of the organization. Besides, I think the issues surrounding OOXML and ODF are orthogonal to what you claim is happening in this 'divergence' of formats. Of course, I believe that there's a fantastic opportunity here for creating tools and blah blah into HTML, XHTML, ODF, etc. But please don't blame us for the fact that not everyone in the world wants to adhere to our views/technology of the Semantic Web. I think that this 'standard' way of thinking has hurt us more than helped to reach the goal. I totally disagree that one parser will be capable to address the issues of metadata in ODF vs HTML. I caught myself making those arguments to later change my mind and understand that in the end it's just code that gets written and overwritten every other day, but a consensus to work together as individuals and put our differences aside is much harder to develop, no pun intended. We were hoping to receive a warm welcome for the work we put into the ODF Metadata for the purpose of advancing the Semantic Web, but as always, you can't please everyone. Fortunately, I still believe ODF Metadata + RDF/XML is making the case for extensibility, flexibility, linked data, openness and so on, independently of whether we used the same parser or not. We need to keep examining ourselves in the likes of Bijan [1] so we assess what are the real problems hindering progress on the Web by our standards and do more showing/telling and implementation/adoption before rushing to standardizing. At least I partially felt that way with ODF Metadata and towards the end of the first draft, I agreed that less was better given that this was the first introduction of RDF to the ODF world. Look at Mozilla for example and I hope that we start small and prove the value before forcing things without immediate benefits. DISCLAIMER: At the risk of sounding schizo, here it goes. Mark, you know we are cool and I'm not at all targeting everything towards you only but to the larger community. We are colleagues, have been working together for a while now and share a lot in common when it comes to RDFa, but I had been meaning to reply to Bijan's email and vent a little on some of the issues surrounding many groups/technologies on the W3C and you had to push me over the edge :D [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2007Oct/0039.html > > Regards, > > Mark > > [1] <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/25055/Metadata_22August2007.txt> >
Received on Sunday, 14 October 2007 19:00:40 UTC