- From: ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ <perpetual-tripper@wwelves.org>
- Date: Sun, 07 Dec 2014 13:45:23 +0100
- To: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>, Christopher Allan Webber <cwebber@dustycloud.org>
- CC: Evan Prodromou <evan@e14n.com>, "public-socialweb@w3.org" <public-socialweb@w3.org>
On 12/05/2014 07:58 PM, James M Snell wrote: > Very well. So the specific recommendation to implementers is > essentially: don't do microsyntax-y type things... use either or both > structured html and audience targeting/as:tag. Whatever any particular > implementation wishes to do beyond that is up to them. I added *PROPOSAL* for our next telecon to capture it, let's please try to word it little better before tuesday and hopefully reach another *RESOLUTION* :) https://www.w3.org/wiki/Socialwg/2014-12-09#mentions.2C_tags.2C_audience_targeting > > On Fri, Dec 5, 2014 at 10:19 AM, Christopher Allan Webber > <cwebber@dustycloud.org> wrote: >> Evan Prodromou writes: >> >>> On 2014-12-05 09:07 AM, ☮ elf Pavlik ☮ wrote: >>>> Once again I think we shouldn't depend on any specific information >>>> buried in the raw content. Application which someone uses for human >>>> interaction, should generate JSON which includes all the required >>>> information in appropriate properties (as:to, as:tag etc.) >>> >>> +1. >>> >>> -Evan >> >> Tack another +1 on there. :) >> >> I think mentioning what well known services have done in a normative >> section is also a-okay. >> >> - Chris >> >
Received on Sunday, 7 December 2014 12:47:33 UTC