Hi All, Could this possibly mean that RDFa becomes the best and nearest import and export form for Exhibit? The first layer of the onion outside of Exhibit that gives an HTML option in every case? In other words, can it become the non-JS canonical form off which Exhibit works?
If so, that would suggest that all other formats should possibly resolve to RDFa, whether used by Exhibit or not. And, also, may that not also offer a general solution to the JS<-->Google indexing conundrum? I'm sure I'm missing something here, but I always love to think about what should be the canonical forms, the common denominators. What looks cool to me is that RDFa meets the RDF canonical test I've been worrying about on other forums, and it meets the Exhibit and indexing test for human display. Is this silly or stupid? For example, can JSON be easily roundtripped to RDFa??? If so, I could become a RDFa fanboy, too! (Or is there a fatal flaw in this thinking somewhere???) I think Keith is really doing some important stuff here, and thanks Ben for crystallizing what has been percolating for some time. Mike Ben Adida wrote: > Stefano Mazzocchi wrote: >> Agreed, this <iframe> idea is not that useful if google sends you to a >> crappy HTML table page instead of your pretty exhibit-enabled one. > > So Keith Alexander's been working on an RDFa importer for Exhibit which > should make it into v2, and it really seems like the ideal solution to > this problem: make an ugly HTML table marked up with RDFa, let Google > index that, and use Exhibit JS to transform that ugliness into the > beautiful lens'ed view. > > You can even make the HTML table not so ugly so your non-JS-enabled > friends can enjoy the data. All of this, and no data repetition. > > I know I'm an RDFa fanboy, so what am I missing? > > -Ben _______________________________________________ General mailing list General@simile.mit.edu http://simile.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/general
