- From: Shelley Powers <shelleyp@burningbird.net>
- Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 12:44:05 -0600
Dan Brickley wrote: > On 17/1/09 19:27, Sam Ruby wrote: >> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Shelley Powers >> <shelleyp at burningbird.net> wrote: >>> The debate about RDFa highlights a disconnect in the decision making >>> related >>> to HTML5. >> >> Perhaps. Or perhaps not. I am far from an apologist for Hixie, (nor >> for that matter and I a strong advocate for RDF), but I offer the >> following question and observation. >> >>> The purpose behind RDFa is to provide a way to embed complex >>> information >>> into a web document, in such a way that a machine can extract this >>> information and combine it with other data extracted from other web >>> pages. >>> It is not a way to document private data, or data that is meant to >>> be used >>> by some JavaScript-based application. The sole purpose of the data >>> is for >>> external extraction and combination. >> >> So, I take it that it isn't essential that RDFa information be >> included in the DOM? This is not rhetorical: I honestly don't know >> the answer to this question. > > Good question. I for one expect RDFa to be accessible to Javascript. > > http://code.google.com/p/rdfquery/wiki/Introduction -> > http://rdfquery.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/demos/markup/markup.html is a > nice example of code that does something useful in this way. > > cheers, > > Dan > I agree, and appreciate Dan for pointing out a specific instance of use. Apologies for not making the assertion explicit. Shelley > -- > http://danbri.org/ >
Received on Saturday, 17 January 2009 10:44:05 UTC