W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html@w3.org > May 2007

Re: Getting beyond the ping pong match (was RE: Cleaning House)

From: Peter Krantz <peter.krantz@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 5 May 2007 23:56:58 +0200
Message-ID: <7b9ad66d0705051456h3cb6586off1a0e2e126944a2@mail.gmail.com>
To: www-html@w3.org

On 5/5/07, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi> wrote:
> Do you expect the usage of class='copyright' for something other than
> copyright notices to be a common practice to a degree that it would
> be unreasonable to assume that class='copyright' marks a copyright
> notice?

I guess the problem is that there isn't enough information in
class="copyright". Without a description of what the author mant by
"copyright" there will be ambiguity and clashes. Automatic discovery
of information by parsing pages will be error prone. Was the author
referring to "copyright" according to US law? Swedish law? Was it a
link to the copyright text rather than the text itself? Or was it just
markup around a link button that copied items from one list to another
(left to right)?

Isn't this what RDF/a solves? By having the ability to specify more
qualified information about the meaning of "copyright" these problems
are avoided?


Received on Saturday, 5 May 2007 21:57:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Thursday, 30 April 2020 16:21:02 UTC