- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2008 12:55:14 -0400
- To: Steve Williams <sbw@digg.com>
- CC: public-rdfa@w3.org
Steve Williams wrote: >> http://playtheweb.org/2008/09/24/rdfa-trials-and-travails/ > > That pretty much describes what I'm feeling as I try to add more RDFa to > Digg. Unfortunately, they haven't approved a comment I made to that story explaining some of the issues with the post... some of the complaints are legitimate, some of them, not so much. Sadly, I didn't save the text of the post - hopefully, they will approve it soon. > The complexity of RDFa keeps pushing me back toward Microformats, but I > sense that RDFa enables different things from Microformats. Again, my > example is SearchMonkey: Yahoo!'s crawler can index any RDFa, whether > Dublin Core or my own custom vocabulary. But they can only index formal > microformats, because custom microformats are indistinguishable from > ordinary mark-up. > > In other words, if I must add custom metadata, RDFa lets me use it in a > third-party tool with no prearrangement. The same isn't possible with > Microformats, which would require me to lobby with Yahoo! (and every > other toolmaker) to recognize this or that Microformat candidate I dream > up. > > Do I have that right? Yes, absolutely correct. -- manu PS: I'm working on a full XHTML+RDFa markup example for Digg (SIOC, FOAF, DC, etc.) - but it's being slowed down by other fires at the moment. :) -- 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 Thursday, 25 September 2008 16:55:51 UTC