Re: head/@profile needed in HTML 5? GRDDL in Linked Data community?

On 25 Feb 2010, at 08:54, Dan Brickley wrote:

>> The microformats community seems happy to explore alternatives.
>> I'm considering pushing back on the 0794 proposal, but it's only
>> worth my time if somebody actually needs head/@profile to survive
>> into HTML 5.
>> Does anybody need it?
> That's a little like asking if someone needs the emergency life-raft
> before telling them whether they get to keep using the boat or not.
> WIthout RDFa, DC would have to use it.


GRDDL will be important, once people in the XML world start really 
groking the advantage of semantics. It will allow them to participate 
at a minimal cost.

GRDDL has already had one very useful effect: it has completely made
the XML/RDF wars disappear. GRDDL is in the back of my mind whenver
someone says they have a new XML syntax. (I think they are doing more
work than they would need to, but it's not worth my time explaining

One problem I see with the XSLT transform method is that it seems very 
slow. I'd rather have a transform directly to RDF such as the new
XSPARQL member submission

I think GRDDL allows for that, btw, but as I have not used it yet I 
don't want to say. This type of transform would make GRDDL (or something
similar) very efficient, as one could then convert any format directly
into a graph for inclusion into a quad store.

>> On a somewhat related topic... as RDFa matures, the need for GRDDL
>> somewhat fades. I wonder, though... to what extent is GRDDL
>> used in the linked data community? What tools consume it? What
>> content providers produce it?
> I've never used GRDDL, and I don't know of anyone actively using it.
> That said, there are many things I don't know! I have tried to get
> Redland/Raptor working with it to consume POWDER a couple of times,
> but with no success. When I think about running GRDDL against wild Web
> content, I have some vague worry about whether untrusted XSLTs are
> sufficiently sandboxed, but I haven't investigated the risks very
> carefully. I remember Bijan raising similar concerns a while back.

As with a lot of things the time between the establishment of a standard
and its adoption can be very long. In the semantic web community we know 
this all too well. 

> cheers,
> Dan

Received on Thursday, 25 February 2010 09:02:16 UTC