W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > March 2010

Re: A new approach to accomplishing RDFa Profiles

From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>
Date: Thu, 18 Mar 2010 16:48:08 +0000
Message-ID: <640dd5061003180948u72e568bpc11204b22570a9f4@mail.gmail.com>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Cc: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>


On Thu, Mar 18, 2010 at 4:37 PM, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
> During the telecon today, it seemed as if were settling on two basic
> techniques to provide RDFa Profiles to beginning web authors. The first
> is the name/value based approach (@token/@prefix/@map/etc.), the second
> is the RDF Vocabulary term approach
> (rdfa:prefix/rdfa:keyword/rdfa:alias/etc.).
> The underlying concern is that we might not get either solution into the
> FPWD at the rate that we're progressing. We're making progress, but the
> path forward is still not clear... and that is putting the FPWDs at risk.
> We could probably spend many telecons discussing the merits and
> drawbacks of each approach, and while that would be helpful, it may be
> more helpful to accept both approaches as viable paths forward and spec
> both of them for now. The understanding would be that we may strip one
> or both features out of the spec before Last Call.
> The goal in spec'ing both features and placing it into the FPWD
> documents is to get wider feedback from the general web authoring
> community. Once spec'ed, we could go to Google, Yahoo, Dublin Core, FOAF
> and other vocabulary providers and ask them which approach they would
> prefer (one, both, or neither).
> For those that are not aware of W3C publishing practices, there doesn't
> need to be consensus for FPWD documents. It is suggested that we release
> early and revise often based on external feedback. Spec'ing both
> approaches would be one way of getting that external feedback.
> If we do this, we should also clearly mark that they are experimental
> and that the Working Group is soliciting the greater web community for
> feedback on both approaches for accomplishing RDFa Profiles.
> This approach ensures that we move forward on the FPWDs and don't become
> deadlocked in trying to find the "right" solution this early in the
> process. Thoughts/comments?
> -- manu
> --
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
> President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: PaySwarming Goes Open Source
> http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2010/02/01/bitmunk-payswarming/
Received on Thursday, 18 March 2010 16:48:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:05:17 UTC