- From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 09:54:00 -0500
- To: public-swd-wg@w3.org
Re: ACTION: Ralph to report on use of RDFa metadata in Recommendations. [recorded in http://www.w3.org/2008/11/18-swd-minutes.html#action02] Currently the W3C Webmaster is permitted to publish Technical Reports [1] other than Recommendations using RDFa markup. This means Working Drafts, Candidate Recommendations, Proposed Recommendations, and Group Notes. This is enforced by W3C publication requirements ("pubrules") [2]. The rationale for not excluding Recommendations at this time is that W3C strongly prefers that Recommendation documents be stable for a long period of time after publication. Should there be any ill effects from the inclusion of RDFa in a TR we would prefer not to have to republish a Recommendation. We therefore have taken a conservative approach to documents that enter that state of maturity. A few weeks ago I raised this again wiht Ian Jacobs, our Head of Communications, who is responsible for maintaining the W3C publication requirements. While neither of us have in mind at this time a specific set of milestones to judge the impact of permitting RDFa in Rec TRs, we both acknowledge that at the moment we have insufficient deployment experience to properly consider the question. So, for now, W3C Recommendations are required to "validate as either HTML 4.x or as some version of XHTML that is a W3C Recommendation" [3] which class does not include XHTML+RDFa. (Member Submissions are not considered to be TRs but do fall under the pubrules requirements. As the submitters may also update these documents, my understanding is that there would be no restriction on using RDFa in a Member Submission.) [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ [2] http://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules [3] <http://www.w3.org/2005/07/pubrules?uimode=filter&uri=>
Received on Tuesday, 6 January 2009 14:54:36 UTC