Web browsers are (hopefully) designed so that they run in every culture. If
you define a custom vocabulary without considering its ability to describe
phenomena of other cultures and try to impose it worldwide, you do more harm
than good to the representatives of those cultures. And considering
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Sat, 23 Aug 2008, Julian Reschke wrote:
Again you're confusing HTTP URLs with URIs.
Using URIs as identifiers allows lots of identification schemes other
than HTTP, in particular ones that are not based on DNS, or that use
DNS, but include a timestamp to address the
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, Dan Brickley wrote:
You mentioned earlier that the RDFish practices around downloading and
interpreting schemas from the Web is news to you. I'll take up an action
to document some of the things we do in that area (eg. with SPARQL for
data merging), probably as a blog
Kristof Zelechovski wrote:
Web browsers are (hopefully) designed so that they run in every culture. If
you define a custom vocabulary without considering its ability to describe
phenomena of other cultures and try to impose it worldwide, you do more harm
than good to the representatives of
On Tue, 26 Aug 2008, Dan Brickley wrote:
If Charlie wants to work with Alice's site, he should agree with Alice
about what vocabularies they're going to use, and then only use that.
Are you suggesting pairwise contracts between producers and consumers of
HTML-embedded structured data?
Kristof Zelechovski wrote:
Web browsers are (hopefully) designed so that they run in every culture. If
you define a custom vocabulary without considering its ability to describe
phenomena of other cultures and try to impose it worldwide, you do more harm
than good to the representatives of
I'm really glad Manu's explanation was helpful. Thanks Manu!
I don't want to interrupt this useful thread, I'll only contribute one
piece of information in the form of an example application:
Is this something that users actually want? How would this actually work?
[...]
It would be
On Tue, Aug 26, 2008 at 11:15 AM, Ben Adida [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's one example. This is not the only way that RDFa can be helpful,
but it should help make things more concrete:
http://developer.yahoo.com/searchmonkey/
Using semantic markup in HTML (microformats and, soon, RDFa),
Greg Houston wrote:
I am not sure if Ben was eluding to this in the last paragraph, but to
further complicate things SearchMonkey is not actually using RDF,
I think you're confusing two different layers.
SearchMonkey parses HTML with microformats, and soon HTML+RDFa, and
makes that data
Ben Adida wrote:
Greg Houston wrote:
I am not sure if Ben was eluding to this in the last paragraph, but to
further complicate things SearchMonkey is not actually using RDF,
I think you're confusing two different layers.
SearchMonkey parses HTML with microformats, and soon HTML+RDFa, and
Ian,
I am addressing these questions both personally and as a representative
of our company, Digital Bazaar. I am certainly not speaking in any way
for the W3C SWD, RDFa Task Force, or Microformats community.
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Mon, 25 Aug 2008, Manu Sporny wrote:
Web browsers currently do
Dan Brickley wrote:
Ben Adida wrote:
Greg Houston wrote:
I am not sure if Ben was eluding to this in the last paragraph, but to
further complicate things SearchMonkey is not actually using RDF,
I think you're confusing two different layers.
SearchMonkey parses HTML with microformats, and
Hi Ian,
The second part of the replies to your questions regarding RDFa are
below. Note that the list of technical merits I was affording RDFa was
not meant to be exhaustive and I won't be adding to them in the body of
this particular e-mail. There are additional ones, however, and we can
get a
Here's a quick 8 minute RDFa Basics video for those of you that are not
familiar with how RDF and RDFa work. I'm posting this in an attempt to
bring those that are unfamiliar with these concepts up to speed.
RDFa Basics (8 minutes)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldl0m-5zLz4
-- manu
--
Manu
14 matches
Mail list logo
