[uf-discuss] RDFa Basics video (8 minutes)
Finished an RDFa Basics video this weekend. It attempts to explain RDF, CURIEs, N3 and basic RDFa in 8 minutes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ldl0m-5zLz4 Thought some of you would want to learn about some of the upcoming features of XHTML2 as well as compare and contrast how RDFa differs from Microformats. Constructive feedback would be great, as I'll probably be doing the advanced RDFa tutorial in a month or so, and will need to know what worked and what didn't in the RDFa Basics video. A high-bitrate version, along with all source material, will be uploaded and put on the Digital Bazaar wiki tomorrow: http://wiki.digitalbazaar.com/en/rdfa-basics -- manu ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RDFa Basics video (8 minutes)
Manu Sporny wrote: Constructive feedback would be great, as I'll probably be doing the advanced RDFa tutorial in a month or so, and will need to know what worked and what didn't in the RDFa Basics video. I'm relatively new to RDFa and this is a great introduction. I'm probably going to say things you've already heard, so please bear with me. For someone like me who has learnt to value the accessibility of standards, the brutally honest takeaway of your introduction is that RDFa does what microformats do and probably more (otherwise why would it exist?), but not clear what exactly and plus it requires XHTML 2.0 and complex syntax. So, when comparing uf and RDFa, adopting RDFa seems a huge leap of faith and a lot of work considering it requires XHTML 2.0 and your introduction does not mention any application supporting RDFa... So, if the goal of this video is to evangelize RDFa to a large audience, I think it would be great to explain why (ex. why id, class and a/href/rel haven't been leveraged more to represent RDF triples) and also explain how an implementation can best leverage the backward-compatibility/evolutionary benefits of microformats with the RDFa more formalist and consistency with other w3 standards. Last, if you believe like me that applications drive standards, not the reverse, then I think what will ultimately get people excited is to have a demonstration of how this content can be leveraged by an application once published and gathered in a RDF store. In an ideal world, putting a aside resource constraints issues, if I had to evangelize RDFa, I would start with the application, for instance showing content in a browser, then showing how it's possible to type queries against this content in a browser plugin. Then only I would show the implementation, and at the end possibly, adoption numbers such as how many people have downloaded the plugin so far. My 2 cents. Guillaume ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RDFa Basics video (8 minutes)
On Jan 7, 2008, at 1:31 PM, Manu Sporny wrote: @class wasn't used because they didn't want to stomp on the Microformats community's implementation, among other reasons. In certain RDFa implementations, bad things happened when you mixed RDFa and Microformats on the same page. Can you maybe elaborate on the bad things you mention here? There should be nothing about microformats that prevented RDFa from using the class attribute, as there's no monopoly on the class attribute. Were those implementations that didn't involve any namespaces nor profiles? I don't see how there could be any conflict with namespaces (since microformats have no namespaces), and a lack of namespaces seems antithetical to my understanding of RDF. Peace, Scott ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
RE: [uf-discuss] RDFa vs microformats
Thanks for the article. -Mike Schinkel http://www.mikeschinkel.com/blogs/ http://www.welldesignedurls.org/ -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Andy Mabbett Sent: Saturday, November 25, 2006 10:39 AM To: Microformats Discuss Subject: [uf-discuss] RDFa vs microformats In case you missied my adding it to the 'wiki;', here's an article about RDFa vs microformats : http://evan.prodromou.name/RDFa_vs_microformats -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
[uf-discuss] RDFa vs microformats
In case you missied my adding it to the 'wiki;', here's an article about RDFa vs microformats : http://evan.prodromou.name/RDFa_vs_microformats -- Andy Mabbett Say NO! to compulsory ID Cards: http://www.no2id.net/ Free Our Data: http://www.freeourdata.org.uk ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RDFa and microformats
On May 30, 2006, at 7:54 PM, Joshua Kinberg wrote: That example of RDFa doesn't look like valid XHTML. Since when have XHTML elements included about, role, and property attributes? http://www.w3schools.com/tags/ref_standardattributes.asp Its XHTML 2, that's why. -ryan ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RDFa and microformats
On 5/30/06, Scott Reynen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 30, 2006, at 1:25 PM, Elias Torres wrote: We could gain more if we gave it a shot at working together by leveraging the unbelievable momentum uFs have and the more general goals of RDFa even though in the end we might end up with *A* totally different specification that what either of the current proposals started as in their respective organizations. I think the disconnect right now is that the process of microformat development requires real-world implementations on which to make decisions, and RDFa has no real-world implementations. WRT to recent blog posts comparing the different ways of embedding metadata in XHTML, I found this summary quite good: http://www.bnode.org/archives2/58 FWIW, I strongly support the suggestions from Evan and Elias. Bruce ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
[uf-discuss] RDFa and microformats
Hi, all. My name is Evan Prodromou, and I'm a web developer. I founded Wikitravel (http://wikitravel.org/ ) and I'm also a developer on MediaWiki (http://www.mediawiki.org/ ), the software that runs Wikipedia. I'm very interested in embedding semantic data into XHTML pages, and implementing microformats is a big part of my dev work for Wikitravel and MW. However, I'm concerned about the future of the project and it's incompatibility with RDFa (http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-rdfa-primer/ ), the W3C plan for embedding RDF in XHTML. I'd like to know what the plan is for dealing with this incompatibility. Ignore RDFa? Hope it goes away? Compete in the marketplace of ideas? I've written an essay on the topic, which you can see here: http://evan.prodromou.name/RDFa_vs_microformats Note that this is my opinion only, not that of my employers nor of the MediaWiki development group. Thanks for your time, ~Evan Evan Prodromou [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://evan.prodromou.name/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RDFa and microformats
Hi Evan, RDFa was discussed a week or so ago on this list, and dismissed as off-topic for this list for a number of very clear reason. You can find the discussion in the uf-discuss archives here: http:// microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-discuss/2006-May/004142.html The posts you really want to read are those from Tantek Çelik (namely: http://microformats.org/discuss/mail/microformats-discuss/ 2006-May/004144.html). That should answer the questions you've posed. Regards, Ben On 30 May 2006, at 16:30, Evan Prodromou wrote: Hi, all. My name is Evan Prodromou, and I'm a web developer. I founded Wikitravel (http://wikitravel.org/ ) and I'm also a developer on MediaWiki (http://www.mediawiki.org/ ), the software that runs Wikipedia. I'm very interested in embedding semantic data into XHTML pages, and implementing microformats is a big part of my dev work for Wikitravel and MW. However, I'm concerned about the future of the project and it's incompatibility with RDFa (http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-rdfa-primer/ ), the W3C plan for embedding RDF in XHTML. I'd like to know what the plan is for dealing with this incompatibility. Ignore RDFa? Hope it goes away? Compete in the marketplace of ideas? I've written an essay on the topic, which you can see here: http://evan.prodromou.name/RDFa_vs_microformats Note that this is my opinion only, not that of my employers nor of the MediaWiki development group. Thanks for your time, ~Evan __ __ Evan Prodromou [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://evan.prodromou.name/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RDFa and microformats
I think that my question was misunderstood; I'm discussing a social and organizational issue rather than a technical one. It's an issue that very much matters to the future of microformats. Let me restate. A W3C effort to embed RDF in HTML is not a matter of if but a matter of when. Once such a project gains steam, it's going to cause Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt among implementers. Competition won't help anyone and will only serve to divide the market of developers. I think it's possible to nip such disruptive competition in the bud. There is still an opportunity to influence the development of the W3C standard such that whatever is created will be backwards-compatible or near-backwards-compatible with current microformats.org formats. That is, such a requirement could be baked into the standard-development process. I think that would be a win-win situation. * The W3C RDF-in-HTML effort wins by piggy-backing on growing microformats popularity. * microformats.org wins by defining a long-term future for itself. * Implementers win by getting the security to use de facto standards today with upwards compatibility with future de jure standards. There are other ways this situation can go; for example, the energy that goes into the fascinating work of developing mf's and promoting their use could instead be diverted to battling other efforts. That doesn't seem very productive to me. ~Evan P.S. At a technical level, I think that existing uf's could be made compatible with some as-of-yet undefined namespaced semantic XHTML format by adding a tiny fig leaf of a namespacing URL somewhere in the document. I don't really care where or how (link rel=default XHTML namespace schema? head profile=...? div new:attribute=...?). And I think that the onus of compatibility could easily be put on NameOfFutureStandard. Evan Prodromou [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://evan.prodromou.name/ ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RDFa and microformats
On May 30, 2006, at 3:53 PM, Elias Torres wrote: I'm missing your point Scott. If what you refer to as real-world implementation is (vcard, vcalendar, etc), then RDFa draws from them just as well uF does. I wasn't comparing microformats and RDFa. I was comparing RDFa and vcard. There were thousands, maybe millions, of real-world vcards to look at when developing the hcard microformat. Where is the existing RDFa data you would like incorporated into future microformat development? Can you provide some URLs where RDFa is being published currently? If so, you should add them to the relevant *-examples pages on the wiki. If not, RDFa is not yet a real-world publishing concern, making it beyond the scope of microformats. See: http://microformats.org/about/ Specifically: adapted to current behaviors. As far as I can tell, RDFa is not a current behavior so what you're suggesting is that microformats should be adapted to future behaviors. Peace, Scott ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RDFa and microformats
That example of RDFa doesn't look like valid XHTML. Since when have XHTML elements included about, role, and property attributes? http://www.w3schools.com/tags/ref_standardattributes.asp -Josh On 5/30/06, Elias Torres [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Scott Reynen wrote: On May 30, 2006, at 6:08 PM, Elias Torres wrote: I'm honestly confused by your answers. Maybe you could specify which parts of this are confusing (or incorrect -- I'm just describing what I see): 1) Only currently published formats (e.g. vcard, RSS, etc.) influence microformats, and... 2) RDFa is not a currently published format, so... 3) RDFa is not currently influencing microformat development. Uh? I believe you are calling vcard a published format. RDFa is NOT a published format, it's a mechanism for embedding published formats into HTML (just like microformats). RDFa doesn't want to influence ufs as a format, but as another specification with some noble goals. Anyways, I'm not sure whether you are aware of what I'm asking here: Microformats and RDFa have different goals and technical quirks and I together with others think that there's an opportunity to have a single story without having to create two incompatible and incomplete solution to embedding metadata in HTML. Excerpt below, just in case you haven't read it. p about=#xtech_talk role=cal:Vevent xmlns:cal=http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/ical#; xmlns:dc=http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/; span property=cal:locationAt the XTech Conference/span, I'm giving span property=cal:summarya talk about web widgets/span, on span property=cal:dtstart content=20060508T18Z May 8th at 10am /span span property=cal:dtend content=20060508T19Z / span property=dc:creatorDanC/span /p Peace, Scott ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: [uf-discuss] RDFa and microformats
Joshua Kinberg wrote: That example of RDFa doesn't look like valid XHTML. Since when have XHTML elements included about, role, and property attributes? http://www.w3schools.com/tags/ref_standardattributes.asp -Josh Josh, You are correct, not only that example but many others too. This is one of the things that Tantek (and many others) find troubling with RDFa. I've heard that there's an alternative specification compatible with XHTML 1.2 coming soon, but going into technical details will only get me an off-topic email response from Tantek very quickly. -Elias On 5/30/06, Elias Torres [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Scott Reynen wrote: On May 30, 2006, at 6:08 PM, Elias Torres wrote: I'm honestly confused by your answers. Maybe you could specify which parts of this are confusing (or incorrect -- I'm just describing what I see): 1) Only currently published formats (e.g. vcard, RSS, etc.) influence microformats, and... 2) RDFa is not a currently published format, so... 3) RDFa is not currently influencing microformat development. Uh? I believe you are calling vcard a published format. RDFa is NOT a published format, it's a mechanism for embedding published formats into HTML (just like microformats). RDFa doesn't want to influence ufs as a format, but as another specification with some noble goals. Anyways, I'm not sure whether you are aware of what I'm asking here: Microformats and RDFa have different goals and technical quirks and I together with others think that there's an opportunity to have a single story without having to create two incompatible and incomplete solution to embedding metadata in HTML. Excerpt below, just in case you haven't read it. p about=#xtech_talk role=cal:Vevent xmlns:cal=http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/ical#; xmlns:dc=http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/; span property=cal:locationAt the XTech Conference/span, I'm giving span property=cal:summarya talk about web widgets/span, on span property=cal:dtstart content=20060508T18Z May 8th at 10am /span span property=cal:dtend content=20060508T19Z / span property=dc:creatorDanC/span /p Peace, Scott ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
Re: RDFA - ugly, unnecessary and offtopic (was Re: [uf-discuss] RDFa)
On 5/19/06, Tantek Çelik [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: * The use of QNames is *NOT* a use of standard XML namespaces, not by a long shot. QNames don't work with CSS Selectors, thus being impractical for presentation, thus failing to satisfy the primary use of semantic markup. I wonder about that too. At the OpenDocument TC, we discussed another way to sort of split the difference here, which is to allow an optional uri to be attached to a style. So, you use styles just as normal, but have the ability to attach further semantics to the definition. * The fact that this draft had to invent a new form of URI (CURIE) should be a strong indicator that there is something wrong. Whenever you find yourself inventing new piece of technology for an orthogonal part of the stack, it usually means you're doing something wrong in your layer. Yeah, but I think the problem here is with QNames, not RDFA. Bruce ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
[uf-discuss] RDFa
A W3C Working Draft published on May 16th: http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml-rdfa-primer-20060516/ For Embedding RDF in XHTML. Gives iCal and vCard examples. In practice, there's a bit mark-up involved than with µF (namespace declarations for a start) but seems to acheive much the same thing in the end. One interesting thing to note is the use of the META element for embedding computer-readible data, e.g. meta property=cal:dtstart content=20060508T1000-0500May 8th at 10am/meta Has this ever been considered for Microformats? It seems especially relevant given the recent uncertainty regarding ABBR/@TITLE and accessibility tools. I have to admit, I've never seen META used outside the HEAD and never even considered it as valid. Could it be a viable alternative (if it's considered that an alternative is ever needed). Regards, Ben ___ microformats-discuss mailing list microformats-discuss@microformats.org http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
