- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Aug 2008 10:22:01 -0400
Kristof Zelechovski wrote: > Web browsers are (hopefully) designed so that they run in every culture. If > you define a custom vocabulary without considering its ability to describe > phenomena of other cultures and try to impose it worldwide, you do more harm > than good to the representatives of those cultures. And considering it > properly does require much time and effort; I do not think you can have that > off the shelf without actually listening to them. Kristof - I believe that you may also be confounding the concept of "the method of expression" and the "vocabulary". RDFa is the method of expression, the vocabulary uses that method of expression to convey semantics. RDFa is a collection of properties[1] for HTML family languages that are used to express semantics through the use of a vocabulary. For an example of what an RDF vocabulary page looks like, check out the following: http://purl.org/media/ That page is marked up using RDFa to not only provide a human-readable version of the vocabulary, but a machine readable version of the vocabulary. > In a way, complaining that the Microformats protocol impedes innovation is > like saying 'we are big and rich and strong, so either you accommodate or > you do not exist'. Not that I do not understand; it is straightforward to > say so and it happens all the time. It's easy to miss the effect that the Microformats approach has on innovation because it isn't stated directly in any Microformats literature. I'd like to re-iterate that I have spent many, many hours creating specifications in the Microformats community and have seen this effect first-hand. I'd like to not focus on theory, but the state of the world as it is right now. Right now, the Microformats process requires everyone to go through our community to create a vocabulary. It is the "we are big and rich and strong, so either you accommodate or you do not exist" approach that you seem to be arguing against. If someone were to come along and request that bloodline be added to the hCard format, it would be rejected as a corner-case. So, unless I understood you incorrectly, RDFa provides a more open environment for innovation because it doesn't require any sort of central authority to approve a vocabulary. One of the things that RDFa strives to do, and is successful at doing, is to not give anyone power over what a constitutes a "valid" vocabulary. If that's not what you were attempting to express, you will have to explain it again, please. -- manu [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax#rdfa-attributes -- Manu Sporny President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: Bitmunk 3.0 Website Launches http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2008/07/03/bitmunk-3-website-launches
Received on Tuesday, 26 August 2008 07:22:01 UTC