Re: Working Group Decision on ISSUE-120 rdfa-prefixes

On 11 April 2011 08:29, Henri Sivonen <> wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-04-08 at 12:13 +0200, Julian Reschke wrote:
>> Absolutely. If Facebook doesn't do it right, let's raise bug reports.
> Considering that the usual name droppees (Facebook, Yahoo! and Google)
> all failed to get it right, I suggest raising the bugs on RDFa itself
> for poor implementability.

Did Yahoo! get it wrong? I'd be surprised, they've got a good history
in this area.

Whatever, I suspect the limited implementations by Facebook and Google
at least reveal more about the culture of those companies than the
implementability of the spec. Looking at:
- there's a good selection of libraries for the various programming
languages, which presumably are based on the specs rather than any
proprietary application requirements.

Building any tool from scratch seems a perverse choice these days...
implementability of low-level support for any spec shouldn't really be
an issue.

But what I believe the RDFa folks should do is highlight the open
source libs with good spec conformance (and commercial-suitable
licenses) to help avoid future Facebooks and Googles falling into the
NIH trap.



Received on Monday, 11 April 2011 09:19:34 UTC