W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-vocabs@w3.org > August 2013

Re: Proposal: Looking inside tables

From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
Date: Tue, 20 Aug 2013 14:00:35 +0100
Message-ID: <CAK-qy=6qr8Ek_p1m=czwYZWxurD2mDy-XjAB8v4GmQ5hcux76Q@mail.gmail.com>
To: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Cc: Cosmin Paun <cpaun88@gmail.com>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On 20 August 2013 13:57, Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org> wrote:
> Dear Cosmin:
> Thanks for pointing this out! As I wrote towards the end of my message: I think we should not add conceptual elements that are mere syntactical aids.
> As for a proposed table mechanism, I think this is taking a fundamentally wrong direction, since tables are mostly generated by iterating over database contents within a loop. Then, you typically use a template language (like Jinja2, Liquid, H20, ...), where adding the markup for each row is straightforward, e.g.:
> <table>
> {% for item in items %}
> <tr itemscope itemtype="http://schema.org/Painting">
>    <td itemprop="name">{{item.name}}</td>
>    <td><a itemprop="image" href="{{item.image_url}}">Image link</a></td>
> ...
> </tr>
> {% endfor %}
> </table>
> And since HTTP supports compression, the repetition of markup for properties and type information will hardly be noticeable.
> So I strongly suggest to not implement the proposal.

Do you mean the whole proposal, or the top-of-your head thoughts you
shared today?

One thing to emphasise about the original proposal is that it is
intended also to work with non-HTML tabular structures, such as CSV.
This btw makes it close in scope to

Received on Tuesday, 20 August 2013 13:01:07 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:49:02 UTC