I'd definitely like to keep the implementation of whatever formats we
use in Gaia given that this is still an experimental feature and the
use cases are likely to evolve as we get user feedback.
It seems to me that given that our use case here, beyond OG, is only
our internal content, I.e. Gaia.
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 4:37 AM, Tantek Çelik tan...@cs.stanford.edu wrote:
Schema.org also provides existing schemas for actions associated with
items
(https://schema.org/docs/actions.html),
...
Currently the IndieWeb community is pursuing Web Actions (and has them
working across
On 2 July 2015 at 03:37, Tantek Çelik tan...@cs.stanford.edu wrote:
tl;dr: It's time. Let's land microformats parsing support in Gecko as
a Q3 Platform deliverable that Gaia can use.
Happy to hear this!
I think there's rough consensus that a subset of OG, as described by
Ted, satisfies
This thread has been fun to follow. There are only 2 hard problems in Comp Sci
and naming things is one of them ;).
Just wanted to quickly chip in: during our lively discussion about naming,
let’s not forget Postel’s Law.
It’s smart to debate which format we should encourage for _publishing_.
On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 11:47 AM, Gordon Brander gbran...@mozilla.com
wrote:
This thread has been fun to follow. There are only 2 hard problems in Comp
Sci and naming things is one of them ;).
Just wanted to quickly chip in: during our lively discussion about naming,
let’s not forget Postel’s
This. I don't want to lose Jonas' point in this long thread, but I also
haven't read anything here that warrants new native parser(s) yet. Let's
iterate in Gaia for now. I don't see how a C++ metadata parser is
advantageous at this point, and the RDF history lessons certainly don't
encourage that
On Wed, Jul 1, 2015 at 7:37 PM, Tantek Çelik tan...@cs.stanford.edu wrote:
There *is* a pretty strong engineering consensus, in both this thread,
and other threads *against* any use of JSON-LD, or anything Linked
Data or otherwise rebranded RDF / Semantic Web, and for good reason.
Indeed,
Great discussion and feedback in this thread - plenty to act on.
Thanks Ted Clancy for kicking this off with an impassioned reality
check. And Thanks in particular to Benjamin Francis for summarizing
product requirements and use-cases, and especially to both Ted and Ben
taking the time last week
Let me start by saying I don't care which format we use. (Formats come, and
formats go.) I do care, however, that my use case is supported.
My use case, speech enabling web apps and web pages for Firefox OS's voice
assistant Vaani, requires that the chosen format support something akin to
On June 27, 2015 at 10:02:47 AM, Anne van Kesteren (ann...@annevk.nl) wrote:
The data I have does not back this up, Microdata is shown to be growing
fast whereas Microformats usage has remained relatively stable.
Also, we didn't find Microformats usage on any of the example
high
On June 29, 2015 at 7:07:33 AM, Michael Henretty (mhenre...@mozilla.com) wrote:
We will definitely start with the simple open graph stuff that Ted
mentioned (og:title, og:type, og:url, og:image, og:description)
since they are so widely used. And yes, even these simple ones are
problematic.
On Saturday, June 27, 2015, Benjamin Francis bfran...@mozilla.com wrote:
On 26 June 2015 at 19:25, Marcos Caceres mar...@marcosc.com
javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','mar...@marcosc.com'); wrote:
Could we see some examples of the cards you are generating already with
existing data from the Web
Thanks for the responses,
Let me reiterate the Product requirements:
1. Support for a syntax and vocabulary already in wide use on the web to
allow the creation of cards for the largest possible volume of existing
pinnable content
2. Support for a syntax with a large enough and/or
On Sat, Jun 27, 2015 at 5:51 AM, Marcos Caceres mar...@marcosc.com wrote:
These look fantastic! so why not start with just those? Or are all those
card types done and thoroughly tested on a good chunk of Web content? As I
mentioned before, I'd be worried about the amount of error recovery
On 26 June 2015 at 19:25, Marcos Caceres mar...@marcosc.com wrote:
Could we see some examples of the cards you are generating already with
existing data from the Web (from your prototype)? The value is really in
seeing that users will get some real benefit, without expecting developers
to add
On 26 June 2015 at 12:58, Ted Clancy tcla...@mozilla.com wrote:
My apologies for the fact that this is such an essay, but I think this has
become necessary.
Firefox OS 2.5 will be unveiling a new feature called Pinning The Web, and
there's been some discussion about whether we should
My apologies for the fact that this is such an essay, but I think this has
become necessary.
Firefox OS 2.5 will be unveiling a new feature called Pinning The Web, and
there's been some discussion about whether we should leverage technologies
like RDFa, Microdata, JSON-LD, Open Graph, and
On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Benjamin Francis bfran...@mozilla.com wrote:
When I look at RDFa, Microdata and JSON-LD I see formal W3C
recommendations, extensive vocabularies which (at least on the surface) are
agreed on by all the big search engines, and I see a clean engineering
solution
On 26 June 2015 at 17:02, Anne van Kesteren ann...@annevk.nl wrote:
I would encourage you to go a little deeper...
We need to judge standards on their merits
I did look deeper. I read most of all the specifications and several papers
on their adoption. My personal conclusion was that not only
19 matches
Mail list logo
