On Jan 1, 2009, at 17:24, Toby A Inkster wrote:
So why RDFa and not Microformats?
There's a possibility that this is a false dichotomy and both are bad.
Firstly, RDFa provides a single unified parsing algorithm that
Microformats do not. Separate parsers need to be created for
hCalendar,
On Jan 1, 2009, at 06:41, Charles McCathieNevile wrote:
There are many cases where people build their own dataset and
queries to solve a local problem. As an example, Opera is not
intersted in asking Google to index data related to internal
developer documents, and use it to produce
On 2/1/09 10:38, Henri Sivonen wrote:
More to the point, Microformats not only require per-format processing
but the processing required for each Microformat isn't specified at all.
That's bad.
Some do have processing specified (at least to some degree):
On Wed, Dec 31, 2008 at 10:41 PM, Charles McCathieNevile
cha...@opera.com wrote:
A standard way to include arbitrary data in a web page and extract it for
machine processing, without having to pre-coordinate their data models.
This isn't a requirement (or in other words, a problem), it's a
On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 12:12 AM, Charles McCathieNevile
cha...@opera.com wrote:
On Fri, 02 Jan 2009 05:43:05 +1100, Andi Sidwell a...@takkaria.org wrote:
On 2009-01-01 15:24, Toby A Inkster wrote:
The use cases for RDFa are pretty much the same as those for
Microformats.
Right, but
Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
...
Solutions for this already exist; embedded N3 in a script tag, just
to name something that Ian already mentioned, allows you to mash RDF
data into a page in a machine-extractable way, and brings in any of
the specific ancillary benefits of RDF.
...
Well, it'll require
Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
Right, but microformats can be used without any changes to the HTML
language, whereas RDFa requires such changes. If they fulfill the same use
cases, then there's not much point in adding RDFa.
...
Why the non-response? This is precisely the point of contention.
Things
On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Julian Reschke julian.resc...@gmx.de wrote:
Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
...
Solutions for this already exist; embedded N3 in a script tag, just
to name something that Ian already mentioned, allows you to mash RDF
data into a page in a machine-extractable way, and
On Fri, Jan 2, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Julian Reschke julian.resc...@gmx.de wrote:
Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
Right, but microformats can be used without any changes to the HTML
language, whereas RDFa requires such changes. If they fulfill the same
use
cases, then there's not much point in adding
On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 11:09:24 +0100, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
The spec draws the line already -- it says that the date has to be in the
proleptic Gregorian calendar, and that the year has to be greater than
zero.
Reading the spec, I have to wonder: Does HTML5 need to specify as much as
In section 2.7.4 of the specification, part of the table reads
FF FF 00 00
FE FF 00 00
text/plain
n/a
UTF-16BE BOM
FF FF 00 00
FF FF 00 00
text/plain
n/a
UTF-16LE BOM
On 2 Jan 2009, at 22:39, 111...@gmail.com wrote:
In section 2.7.4 of the specification, part of the table reads
FF FF 00 00
FE FF 00 00
text/plain
n/a
UTF-16BE BOM
FF FF 00 00
FF FF 00 00
text/plain
n/a
UTF-16LE BOM
in the 1 January draft.
Should this be
FF FF 00 00
FE FF 00 00
text/plain
n/a
On 2 Jan 2009, at 21:53, Asbjørn Ulsberg wrote:
On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 11:09:24 +0100, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
The spec draws the line already -- it says that the date has to be
in the
proleptic Gregorian calendar, and that the year has to be greater
than
zero.
Reading the spec,
Asbjørn, while I can't give you a message-list, please believe me when I say
that the HTML5 specifications on this are the result of
quite a bit of discussion and IMHO represent a reasonable compromise between
driving the developers crazy and supporting dates and
times back to the Cenozoic era.
With the new year I thought I'd take the opportunity to remind everyone of
some of our community's resources:
The FAQ - http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/FAQ
This contains many replies to common questions about process,
timetable, and about common topics of discussion. I recommend it to
15 matches
Mail list logo
