- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 23:28:22 +0100
- To: Jarno van Driel <jarnovandriel@gmail.com>
- Cc: "martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org" <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>, Vicki Tardif Holland <vtardif@google.com>, "Jason Johnson (BING)" <jasjoh@microsoft.com>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On 16 September 2014 22:21, Jarno van Driel <jarnovandriel@gmail.com> wrote: > I think the omission of 'itemposition' is problematic in this case as there > is no implied order. Which a breadcrumb definitely has. That's actually one > of the things I think is wrong with the datavocabulary breadcrumb (as well > as it generating multiple top level entities without any property to link > them to the WebPage). > > Without 'itemposition' we'd have to revert to nesting elements to be able to > preserve the order. Yes, I meant to add those in after I got it working in RDFa, started chatting w/ Stephane Corlosquet to that end, ... and then ran out of tuesday. But yes, position is needed explicitly... Dan
Received on Tuesday, 16 September 2014 22:28:50 UTC