Re: Comment on the RDFa API working draft

I think the first place to start would be to check W3C policy on such 
things, and I don't exactly recall what it is.  I'm fairly sure the groups 
I've worked in over the years have avoided such references, preferring to 
use reserved URIs (http://example.org/mysample), or else just references to 
"uses a search engine".

> On the other hand, mentioning real technologies and products makes the use cases a lot more convincing

Perhaps, but this is a draft specification, not draft promotional material. 
  I think it's perfectly appropriate in giving public presentations on RDFa 
to point out things like "a variety of widely used search engines, such as 
Google, (Bing, whatever), support this technology".  I don't feel that 
belongs or is necessary in the specification itself.

Again, I'd leave this to W3C policy and what others in the community feel. 
  If most others are happy with it, I wouldn't take the trouble to fight it 
hard, but it doesn't seem right to me, and I think it actually makes the 
specification somewhat more likely to seem dated in, say, 10 years.  I 
mean, how would you feel today reading a spec for that says "Sally uses 
Alta Vista to find a restaurant".  If you were 18 years old, would it 
likely mean anything to you.  15 years ago, this reference would have been 
as obvious as Google is today.  Alta Vista still exists, but the reference 
would be much more obscure now.

Noah

On 9/24/2010 10:45 AM, Knud Hinnerk Möller wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 23 Sep 2010, at 16:50, Noah Mendelsohn wrote:
>
>> This is a comment on the RDFa API working draft of 23 September 2010 [1].
>>
>> I suggest you try to avoid references to commercial products and organizations in the examples, e.g. "Amy has enriched her band's web-site to include Google Rich Snippets event information", and especially "Brian finds Amy's web-site through Google and opens the band's page."
>>
>> Especially the latter seems completely inappropriate.  Wouldn't it be better, in an open standard, development of which is supported by many organizations including some of Google's competitors, to say "Brian uses a search engine to find Amy's web-site, and he opens the band's page."? Besides, if Google were to fade in importance, as Alta Vista did, the reference would become unnecessarily confusing to later readers.
>
> You have a point in saying that such references might be considered a bit one-sided or inappropriate by some. On the other hand, mentioning real technologies and products makes the use cases a lot more convincing. By putting in these references, we underline that such use cases are relevant right now, they can actually be implemented, and are not just some pie-in-the-sky fantasy conjured up by Semantic Web believers. Maybe it would be an option to broaden the references a bit and put in some Google competitors as well? E.g., Yahoo's search monkey technology comes to mind.
>
> Other opinions?
>
> Cheers,
> Knud
>
>>
>> Thank you.
>>
>> Noah
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-rdfa-api-20100923/
>>
>
> -------------------------------------------------
> Knud Möller, PhD
> +353 - 91 - 495086
> Smile Group: http://smile.deri.ie
> Digital Enterprise Research Institute
>    National University of Ireland, Galway
> Institiúid Taighde na Fiontraíochta Digití
>    Ollscoil na hÉireann, Gaillimh
>
>
>
>

Received on Friday, 24 September 2010 15:12:14 UTC