On Feb 25, 2009, at 19:41, Manu Sporny wrote:
You have to provide a better counter-solution to ccREL in order to
make your point.
I already did on the WHATWG list earlier, but yeah, I should have made
a concrete proposal for the benefit of this list, too.
I suggest using the built-in
Henri Sivonen wrote:
I suggest using the built-in key-value mechanisms of various popular
file formats ((X)HTML, PNG, JPEG, Ogg, PDF, MP4, ID3, etc.) to encode
author, license URI and, optionally, a non-author attribution name and
attribution URL inside each file
However not all popular file
On Feb 20, 2009, at 04:39, Ben Adida wrote:
Henri Sivonen wrote:
Also, if RDFa turned out to be successful in text/html (with or
without
a blessing by the HTML 5 spec), we'd be left with syntactic
complexity
in the platform. In particular, if RDFa succeeds for a couple of use
cases and
On Feb 20, 2009, at 07:49, Manu Sporny wrote:
Henri Sivonen wrote:
I'm particularly worried about ccREL succeeding to the point that an
alternative solution can no longer be launched into the market to
replace it and Free Culture then getting encumbered by the syntactic
complexity preventing
Henri Sivonen wrote:
I'm particularly worried about ccREL succeeding to the point that an
alternative solution can no longer be launched into the market to
replace it and Free Culture then getting encumbered by the syntactic
complexity preventing even further success.
Note that I didn't
Henri Sivonen wrote:
Also, if RDFa turned out to be successful in text/html (with or without
a blessing by the HTML 5 spec), we'd be left with syntactic complexity
in the platform. In particular, if RDFa succeeds for a couple of use
cases and fails in general (or succeeds otherwise in far down
Henri Sivonen wrote:
I'm particularly worried about ccREL succeeding to the point that an
alternative solution can no longer be launched into the market to
replace it and Free Culture then getting encumbered by the syntactic
complexity preventing even further success.
Which alternative
On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi wrote:
On Feb 17, 2009, at 05:40, Manu Sporny wrote:
The front-runner for how we address the xmlns: issue seems to be
@prefix. I believe using @prefix to specify CURIE prefixes will address
all of your concerns with XHTML/HTML DOM
Henri Sivonen wrote:
Using full URIs exposes the cost of the actual usability problem
to the RDF community instead of making adjacent communities bear
the cost through complication to their formats.
Let me attempt to summarize your e-mail.
You believe that full URIs are less bad than CURIEs,
Henri,
The front-runner for how we address the xmlns: issue seems to be
@prefix. I believe using @prefix to specify CURIE prefixes will address
all of your concerns with XHTML/HTML DOM incompatibilities. Please
confirm or reject this assertion (and be specific about what you
do/don't like about
10 matches
Mail list logo
