- From: Noah Mendelsohn <nrm@arcanedomain.com>
- Date: Thu, 11 Aug 2011 21:13:41 -0400
- To: TAG Member List <tag@w3.org>
- CC: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, TAG List <www-tag@w3.org>, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>, "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org>
Re-mailing with TAG action references so Tracker will pick them up (ironically, the reference to the action URI in the subject doesn't do it, I think, only the syntax below.) Anyway... Tracker, this relates to TAG ACTION-510 and to ACTION-580. BTW: Tim is indeed the person to ask, but my reading is: yes, removal of that section resolves the concern and renders the issue moot. Not sure whether I can find Tim before then, so I'll arrange for confirmation no later than the 13-15 Sept. TAG F2F. Thank you. Noah On 8/11/2011 8:20 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: > Does the following change sufficiently make the issue moot? > > http://html5.org/r/6427 > > - Sam Ruby > > On 06/27/2011 10:50 AM, Tim Berners-Lee wrote: >> >> On 2011-05 -26, at 01:20, Ian Hickson wrote: >> >>> On Fri, 20 May 2011, Tim Berners-Lee wrote: >>>>> >>>>> http://dev.w3.org/html5/md/#examples >>>>> >>>>> In the example, the HCARD data is to be parsed to produce RDF data >>>>> with a predicate whose URI is >>>>> http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/microdata#http://microformats.org/profile/hcard%23:adr >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> That is an appalling URI, for a number of reasons. >>>>> >>>>> 1. It is horribly long >>> >>> It's opaque and not intended for human consumption, so that doesn't seem >>> like a serious problem. >> >> URIs are, of course, seen by humans in fact in many cases >> even though to first order a web browsing person should not see any. >> >> A developer or a data analyst writing a SPARQL query >> like >> select * where { ?who >> <http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/microdata#http://microformats.org/profile/hcard%23:adr >> >> > ?where } >> >> is not going to be so. >> >> >> Remember that there is while the HTML code for a web page >> is rather cumbersome to look at compared the page, if you extract the >> data and serialize it as turtle it often looks pretty easy for >> the advanced user to understand. (Say the same level of user as one >> who can handle spreadsheets). >> >> >> >>> 2. It is constructed including two other URIS, so that there is a >>>>> combination of two authorities, so it will only be supported if the >>>>> w3.org <http://w3.org> and microformats.org >>>>> <http://microformats.org> sites coordinate the generation of new >>>>> microformats. >>> >>> Actually the W3C part of the URI is fixed and used for all microdata >>> vocabularies, so the w3.org <http://w3.org> site doesn't have to be >>> involved in the >>> development of the vocabulary at all. I'm happy to use another URL if you >>> would like; I used that one for consistency with e.g. the URLification of >>> the rel="" values in RDFa. It could be a whatwg.org >>> <http://whatwg.org> URL or even a separate >>> scheme altogether. The latter would also reduce your issue #1 above about >>> length. >> >> The microdata spec should not be arbitrarily different from the RDFa >> spec. The URIs generated should work with RDF. >> >> Yes, a shorter URI which is in the w3.org <http://w3.org> space and then >> has a hash >> followed by the localname could work, effectively a default namespace >> hosted by w3c, who would support it on the web. >> Or microformats but they might not want to serve RDF schemas. >> >> >> >>> >>> >>>>> It makes W3C responsible for supporting things added in >>>>> microformats.org <http://microformats.org> which, while W3c may need >>>>> to do this special cases >>>>> should not be built into the semantics of the HTML language. >>> >>> There is no effort needed on the W3C side for this at all. If the W3C >>> would rather not be part of this though I'm happy to change the URL. >>> >>> >>>>> 3. Because it has a hash in he middle instead of at the end, typical >>>>> serializers won't be able to use namespace prefix on output, so any >>>>> files which use these URLs will by ugly, unreadable, and large. >>> >>> I don't understand this issue. Could you elaborate? >> >> Serializers use namespaces to make the output compact and >> readable. They typically use N3/turtle prefixes or XML namespaces as >> abbreviations >> where the hash or if none the last slash is taken as the end of >> the namespace URI, and everything from then on must be basically a >> localname. >> >> >>> >>> If the URL syntax allowed the # character in a fragment identifier, we >>> could avoid escaping the second one; would that help? >> >> No. >> >> Tim >> >>> >>> -- >>> Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL >>> http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. >>> Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.' >>> >> > > >
Received on Friday, 12 August 2011 01:14:10 UTC