W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > December 2011

Re: Tasks in support of HTML Microdata

From: Patrick Logan <patrickdlogan@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Dec 2011 10:54:52 -0800
Message-ID: <CAD_aa-8Bk3ZPfYim6BrGQL-SSVbzsAAbfVRq3yTb-ZDJb5a=jg@mail.gmail.com>
To: WebID XG <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
Sorry - I read the 12 December 2011 draft a bit more thoroughly. I see
the spec includes Turtle as optional in section 1.2:

"The document may be published in a number of other RDF serialization
formats, such as N3 [N3] or Turtle [TURTLE]. Any serialisation must be
transformable automatically and in a standard manner to an RDF Graph,
using technologies such as GRDDL [GRDDL-PRIMER]."

But " Processing the WebID Profile" does not mention this.

So the immediate question w.r.t Turtle is whether or not to *require* Turtle?

I would suggest yes, for the reasons in my previous email, quoted below...


On Thu, Dec 22, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Patrick Logan <patrickdlogan@gmail.com> wrote:
> I'd like to begin a new thread on this list for tracking and closing
> the issue of supporting HTML Microdata. Please put non-specific (i.e.
> not strictly aimed at resolving this issue) in a separate thread with
> a different subject line.
> Let's keep this thread short and to the point.
> There is an issue on record:
> http://www.w3.org/2005/Incubator/webid/track/issues/66
> The next tasks toward completion are the following:
> a. Spec how a WebID profile graph would look serialised in terms of Microdata
> b. Spec how an application can process RDF/XML _and_ RDFa _and_
> Microdata in a uniform fashion for the basic verification (i.e.,
> public key description)
> c. Spec how an application can process RDF/XML _and_ RDFa _and_
> Microdata in a uniform fashion for arbitrary information, such as
> profile fields (display name, homepage, online accounts, etc.)
> * Does anyone disagree that these are the next steps in support of
> HTML Microdata for WebID profiles?
> * Does anyone have questions about these tasks?
> * Does anyone intend to take these on?
> * Is anyone obligated to take these on?
> * What happens to Issue 66 if no one moves it forward?
> Thanks
> -Patrick
Received on Thursday, 22 December 2011 18:55:28 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:39:50 UTC