- From: Peter Mika <pmika@yahoo-inc.com>
- Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 12:52:12 +0100
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- CC: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, "public-rdfa@w3.org" <public-rdfa@w3.org>
Hi Manu, I thought I would just address one specific point: > Yahoo defines both this: > > media:Image, media:Audio, media:Video > > and this: > > media:medium - The type of object: image | audio | video | document | > executable. > > What's the point of having both a 'medium' property and classes that > define the medium? media:medium shouldn't exist at all - use one or the > other, not both. Using both is confusing and will inevitably lead to > more pain for Yahoo down the line when you have to look at not only > @typeof information, but also medium information. > We need this to simplify the life of publishers who want a single line to indicate that there is a video attached to the page: <link rel="media:video" href="..."> which is similar to Facebook Share: <link rel="video_src" href="...> From a site owner point of view this is significantly clearer than adding a typeof and thus is much more likely to gain adoption. Note that with the RDFa solution the site owner already had to work a bit harder, because he/she needed to add the XML namespace. In summary, I consider this a design pattern, not a bug, even if it sacrifices a principle. Best, Peter
Received on Wednesday, 18 March 2009 11:53:21 UTC