- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 12:36:33 -0400
- To: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
- CC: Martin McEvoy <martin@weborganics.co.uk>
Martin McEvoy wrote: > Talking of "hacks" why is this NOT a "hack" : > http://wiki.digitalbazaar.com/en/HAudio_RDFa? it looks like a direct rip > from the Microformats wiki, That's because it started out as a direct rip from the Microformats wiki - the fact that it is so close to hAudio was deliberate. The intention was to create a cross-community vocabulary that would work for people jumping between RDFa and Microformats. The outcome of that research was this: http://purl.org/media/audio The Audio RDF Vocabulary above has a clean/direct mapping to/from Microformats hAudio. The hAudio RDFa specification was replaced by the Audio RDF Vocabulary several months ago. I have added a note to the page you linked to in order to make that decision more clear and highlight the historical nature of that document[1]. If there are "hacks", please enlighten me because I am unaware of there being any and I would certainly want to fix them if they exist. > RDFa is Behaving a little like "The Borg" dont you think, "You will be > assimilated" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Borg_(Star_Trek) :-) Slow your roll, Martin - some of the stuff you've written lately seems to imply that there is some sort of arrogance/hidden agenda that is being carried out by this community instead of calm rational thought behind the decisions that were made on RDFa. Mark has made several valid points that seem to have been completely ignored (or misunderstood). While I don't think that re-using @content in Microformat-only markup is an issue... it certainly is an issue when you mix Microformats and RDFa. It is a piece-meal solution as it only addresses the Microformats accessibility problem, not the larger problem of a unified prefixing[2] and parsing mechanism. When you say stuff like this: > Martin McEvoy wrote: > I'm afraid Microformats do have a generic parsing model ... it becomes clear that you don't grasp the fundamentals of what a "generic parsing model" means. Microformats absolutely do not have a generic parsing model. You will be very hard pressed to make that argument. Remember that we're all after the same thing here - practical web semantics. We all continue to strive and work together in reaching this goal and pointing fingers at your colleagues alluding to "borg"-ish behavior doesn't help move us forward. This community is a very rational, methodical group who cares about semantic web scalability. I have never seen a good rational argument fail here. If you're not making headway with your argumentation, take a look at the premises that you are working with and see if they're in error. Here are the premises that I've seen you assert that are in error: - Microformats have a generic parsing model - RDF and Microformats have incompatible data models - Re-using RDFa attributes for Microformats will have acceptable consequences - Distributed innovation leads to anti-social behavior - Namespaces and CURIEs are the same thing - There already exists a data model that works "better" than RDF for the purposes of Microformats - @typeof is the same as @class - Only Microformats are about what you can see on a web page and the "take away web" - RDFa has ignored the here and now If you agree with any of the statements above, then you should spend some time re-thinking those premises before continuing because there is proof counter to what you are asserting. Our goal should not be to -only- fix the Microformats accessibility issue, but to fix -all- Microformats parsing model issues and provide a mechanism to allow other non-Microformats approaches to exist. This isn't just about the Microformats community. I think we are close in accomplishing this and it is with this goal in mind that we should consider proposals such as re-using @content for Microformats. I'm sure you will agree that re-using @content in uFs doesn't actually address the real problem: Microformats do not have a robust parsing model. -- manu [1]http://wiki.digitalbazaar.com/index.php?title=HAudio_RDFa&diff=2496&oldid=2352 [2]http://rdfa.info/wiki/RDFa_Vocabularies -- Manu Sporny President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: Bitmunk 3.0 Website Launches http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2008/07/03/bitmunk-3-website-launches
Received on Monday, 15 September 2008 16:37:12 UTC