Danny Ayers wrote: > > > On 26/01/07, *Paul Walsh, Segala* <paulwalsh@segala.com > <mailto:paulwalsh@segala.com>> wrote: > > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > [PW] couldn't have put it better myself. You'll see from Sam's blog > that it's plastered with Microformats. Why doesn't everyone on this > list vote RDFa <g> > > Heh, I already did. Though truth be told I'm rather on the fence when it > comes to RDFa because of the current ties to XHTML 2.0 (and QNames in > attributes are ugly). Danny, this is no longer true. Yes, it came out of the XHTML2 group, but the current line and work in the RDFa group is clearly trying to adapt itself not only to XHTML1 but also to tag-soup HTML. I hope that the RDFa primer and use cases will be re-published in the coming weeks and that would help in dissipating this false image. The current goal is to express RDFa purely in terms of attributes, not introducing any change in the basic HTML content model, and *not* being dependent on *any* XHTML2 features. The biggest mistake in this whole story is that RDFa did not publish often enough to give a better image. I hope that this will improve in the coming months Ivan > On the other hand, browsers & a lot of people > already support microformats as HTML and they can express perfectly good > RDF given GRDDL (and eRDF, if need be). But I've been assured by people > who's opinion I trust that RDFa is a Good Thing, so I try not to quibble > ;-) > > Cheers, > Danny. > > -- > > http://dannyayers.com -- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead URL: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ PGP Key: http://www.cwi.nl/%7Eivan/AboutMe/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Friday, 26 January 2007 12:32:07 UTC