- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Fri, 22 Aug 2008 11:07:37 +0200
Bonner, Matt wrote: >>> On Wed, Aug 20, 2008 at 5:22 PM, Bonner, Matt wrote: >>> >>> Hola, >>> >>> I see that the Creative Commons has proposed additions to HTML >>> to support licenses (ccREL): >>> http://www.w3.org/Submission/2008/SUBM-ccREL-20080501/ >>> ... > >>> Tab Atkins Jr. replied: >>> The whole thing would be best expressed as a microformat, as the >>> entire thing can be made just as machine- and human-readable without >>> having to introduce an entire new addition to html. I think someone >>> is a little confused about the important of CC... > > then Dan Brickley wrote: >> I encourage you to (re)-read >> http://www.w3.org/Submission/2008/SUBM-ccREL-20080501/ ... the spec >> explains that all of CC's concrete markup requirements are addressed >> by the HTML additions in the RDFa spec. It does not propose *any* new >> HTML markup to address CC's specific needs. > > (big snip) > >> In other words, adding 'about', 'property', 'resource', 'datatype' and >> 'typeof' and a namespace-URI association convention to HTML5 ... > > Just so I understand you, are you saying that attributes aren't markup? > Because first you say "no new markup", then you list 5 attributes to add. Ah, sorry for the unclarity. Attributes are markup. The sentence comes as a whole: I meant that ccREL proposes no new *CC-specific* attributes or elements. They get their job done using general RDFa markup. > Second, the Introduction cites RDFa, which footnote 4 describes as "an > emerging collection of attributes and processing rules for extending > XHTML to support RDF". However, the Introduction text and example go > on to talk about HTML. Independent of any other discussions, I think it > behooves the authors to clarify their intent. Is this for XHTML, HTML or > both? Yes, this could be clearer. The group's general line (Ben feel free to correct me) is that this attribute-driven markup style is intended to be largely neutral of its 'carrier' format, but that RDFa-in-XHTML is the only version that is fully specified with implementor tests etc underway. For this markup to work in other XML languages would require some more work; for it to be deployed in non-XML HTML (HTML5 etc) requires even more. But the general notion is that these attributes could be deployed in SVG-based, HTML5/6-based etc. languages too, ie. that this isn't a project tightly bound to (some specific version of) XHTML. Of course in a non-XML context, some other mechanism is needed (eg. link rels) to associate abbreviations with URLs. Also in http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/ (now in CR at W3C, http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/CR-rdfa-syntax-20080620/) [[ RDFa is a specification for attributes to be used with languages such as HTML and XHTML to express structured data. [...] This document only specifies the use of the RDFa attributes with XHTML. ]] Does that help? cheers Dan -- http://danbri.org/
Received on Friday, 22 August 2008 02:07:37 UTC