On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Frank Hellenkamp wrote:
I agree entirely. I actually tried to find a workable solution to
address this but unfortunately the only general solutions I could come
up with that would allow this were selector-based, and in practice
authors are still having trouble
On Tue, 9 Jun 2009, Jonas Sicking wrote:
Some of the improvement suggestions that I have heard that sounds
interesting, though possibly for the next version of microdata.
* Support for specifying a machine-readable value, such as for dates,
colors, numbers, etc.
I expect we will
On Mon, 11 May 2009, Simon Pieters wrote:
On Sun, 10 May 2009 12:32:34 +0200, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
Page 3:
h2My Catsh2
dl
dtSchrouml;dinger
dd item=com.damowmow.cat
meta property=com.damowmow.name content=Schrouml;dinger
meta
Some of the improvement suggestions that I have heard that sounds
interesting, though possibly for the next version of microdata.
* Support for specifying a machine-readable value, such as for dates,
colors, numbers, etc.
I expect we will add support for these based on demand, the same way
The problem of W3C DTD DDoS does not apply to CURIE because software
processing RDF does not need to retrieve the resources referenced on a
regular basis. Even in the case of DTD, the problem is that some software
does not cache, not that some software tries to access it.
IMHO,
Chris
Ian Hickson wrote:
I agree entirely. I actually tried to find a workable solution to address
this but unfortunately the only general solutions I could come up with
that would allow this were selector-based, and in practice authors are
still having trouble understanding how to use Selectors
On May 14, 2009, at 23:52, Eduard Pascual wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Philip Taylor excors+wha...@gmail.com
wrote:
It doesn't matter one syntax or another. But if a syntax already
exists (RDFa), building a new syntax should be properly justified.
It was at the start of this
Henri Sivonen wrote:
There's no indirection. A decade of Namespaces in XML shows that both
authors and implementors have trouble getting prefix-based indirection
right.
It's true that people get this wrong again and again. But it's also true
that lots of developers understand it once for
On May 18, 2009, at 12:18, Julian Reschke wrote:
Henri Sivonen wrote:
There's no indirection. A decade of Namespaces in XML shows that
both authors and implementors have trouble getting prefix-based
indirection right.
It's true that people get this wrong again and again. But it's also
Henri Sivonen wrote:
The interesting question here is whether there's a better system.
1) Centralized allocation of short names.
Sounds like urn: to me. Registry is defined in RFC 3406.
2) Prefixing a short name by (an abbreviation of) the name of the
vocabulary, which makes the
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi wrote:
On May 14, 2009, at 23:52, Eduard Pascual wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Philip Taylor excors+wha...@gmail.com
wrote:
It doesn't matter one syntax or another. But if a syntax already
exists (RDFa), building a new
On May 18, 2009, at 6:05 AM, Eduard Pascual wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi
wrote:
On May 14, 2009, at 23:52, Eduard Pascual wrote:
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Philip Taylor excors+wha...@gmail.com
wrote:
It doesn't matter one syntax or
On May 18, 2009, at 16:05, Eduard Pascual wrote:
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:38 AM, Henri Sivonen hsivo...@iki.fi
wrote:
(If we were limited to reasoning about something that we don't have
experience with yet, I might believe that people can't be too inept
to use
prefix-based indirection.
On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 10:02 AM, Leif Halvard Silli l...@malform.no wrote:
[...]
But may be, after all, it ain't so bad. It is good to have the opportunity.
:-)
This is the exactly the point (at least, IMO): RDFa may be quite good
at embedding inline metadata, but can't deal at all with
Tab Atkins Jr. On 09-05-15 22.15:
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Leif Halvard Silli
Toby Inkster on Wed May 13 02:19:17 PDT 2009:
Hear hear. Lets call it Cascading RDF Sheets.
http://buzzword.org.uk/2008/rdf-ease/spec
http://buzzword.org.uk/2008/rdf-ease/reactions
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 10:17 PM, Maciej Stachowiak m...@apple.com wrote:
[...]
From my cursory study, I think microdata could subsume many of the use cases
of both microformats and RDFa.
Maybe. But microformats and RDFa can handle *all* of these cases.
Again, which are the benefits of creating
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On May 14, 2009, at 1:30 PM, Shelley Powers wrote:
So, if I'm pushing for RDFa, it's not because I want to win. It's
because I have things I want to do now, and I would like to make sure
have a reasonable chance of working a couple of years in the future.
And yeah,
On Thu, 14 May 2009 22:30:41 +0200, Shelley Powers shell...@burningbird.net
wrote:
I'm not 100% sure microdata can really achieve this, but I think making
the attempt is a positive step.
It can't, don't you see?
Microdata will only work in HTML5/XHTML5.
Actually, as specified, it would
On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 10:04 AM, Leif Halvard Silli l...@malform.no wrote:
Toby Inkster on Wed May 13 02:19:17 PDT 2009:
Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
Hear hear. Lets call it Cascading RDF Sheets.
http://buzzword.org.uk/2008/rdf-ease/spec
http://buzzword.org.uk/2008/rdf-ease/reactions
I
jgra...@opera.com wrote:
Quoting Philip Taylor excors+wha...@gmail.com:
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
One of the more elaborate use cases I collected from the e-mails sent in
over the past few months was the following:
USE CASE: Annotate structured
James Graham wrote:
jgra...@opera.com wrote:
Quoting Philip Taylor excors+wha...@gmail.com:
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
One of the more elaborate use cases I collected from the e-mails
sent in
over the past few months was the following:
USE CASE:
On 14/5/09 14:18, Shelley Powers wrote:
James Graham wrote:
jgra...@opera.com wrote:
Quoting Philip Taylor excors+wha...@gmail.com:
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
One of the more elaborate use cases I collected from the e-mails
sent in
over the past few
Dan Brickley wrote:
On 14/5/09 14:18, Shelley Powers wrote:
James Graham wrote:
jgra...@opera.com wrote:
Quoting Philip Taylor excors+wha...@gmail.com:
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
One of the more elaborate use cases I collected from the e-mails
sent
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 1:25 PM, Dan Brickley dan...@danbri.org wrote:
Having HTML5-microdata -to- RDF parsers is pretty critical to having test
cases that help us all understand where RDFa-Classic and HTML5 diverge. I'm
very happy to see this work being done and that there are multiple
On May 14, 2009, at 5:18 AM, Shelley Powers wrote:
So much concern about generating RDF, makes one wonder why we didn't
just implement RDFa...
If it's possible to produce RDF triples from microdata, and if RDF
triples of interest can be expressed with microdata, why does it
matter if
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On May 14, 2009, at 5:18 AM, Shelley Powers wrote:
So much concern about generating RDF, makes one wonder why we didn't
just implement RDFa...
If it's possible to produce RDF triples from microdata, and if RDF
triples of interest can be expressed with microdata,
On May 14, 2009, at 1:04 PM, Shelley Powers wrote:
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On May 14, 2009, at 5:18 AM, Shelley Powers wrote:
So much concern about generating RDF, makes one wonder why we
didn't just implement RDFa...
If it's possible to produce RDF triples from microdata, and if RDF
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On May 14, 2009, at 1:04 PM, Shelley Powers wrote:
Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
On May 14, 2009, at 5:18 AM, Shelley Powers wrote:
So much concern about generating RDF, makes one wonder why we
didn't just implement RDFa...
If it's possible to produce RDF triples
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 3:54 PM, Philip Taylor excors+wha...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
If we restrict literals to strings [...]
But *why* restrict literals to strings?? Being unable to state that
2009-05-14 is a date makes that value completely useless: it would
only be useful on contexts where a
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 5:00 PM, Jonas Sicking jo...@sicking.cc wrote:
* Support for specifying a machine-readable value, such as for dates,
colors, numbers, etc.
* Support for tabular data.
Especially the former is very interesting to me. I even wonder it
would allow replacing the time
On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 2:54 PM, Philip Taylor excors+wha...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
urn:subject urn:predicate _:X .
[...]
div item
link itemprop=about href=urn:subject
meta itemprop=urn:predicate item id=X
/div
[...]
So, I can't see any limits on expressivity other than that
On May 14, 2009, at 1:30 PM, Shelley Powers wrote:
So, if I'm pushing for RDFa, it's not because I want to win. It's
because I have things I want to do now, and I would like to make
sure have a reasonable chance of working a couple of years in the
future. And yeah, once SVG is in HTML5,
Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
Hear hear. Lets call it Cascading RDF Sheets.
http://buzzword.org.uk/2008/rdf-ease/spec
http://buzzword.org.uk/2008/rdf-ease/reactions
I have actually implemented it. It works. RDFa is better though.
-Toby
Toby Inkster on Wed May 13 02:19:17 PDT 2009:
Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
Hear hear. Lets call it Cascading RDF Sheets.
http://buzzword.org.uk/2008/rdf-ease/spec
http://buzzword.org.uk/2008/rdf-ease/reactions
I have actually implemented it. It works.
Oh! Thanks for sharing.
RDFa is
In terms of prefixes, I find that 'com.foaf-project.name' is a lot more
difficult to write than 'foaf:name'. Reverse domain names are
non-intuitive for non-programmer types (or non-Java programmers).
If we can come up with a way of using the string foaf:name without
having to declare foaf in
Let me start with some apologies:
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 12:55 PM, Eduard Pascual herenva...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
Seeing that solutions are already being discussed
here, I'm trying to put the ideas into a human-readable document that
I plan to submit to this list either late today or early
I don't really like to be harsh, but I have some criticism to this,
and it's going to be quite hard. However, my goal by pointing out what
I consider so big mistakes is to help HTML5 becoming as good as it
could be.
First issue: it solves a (major) subset of what RDFa would solve.
However, it has
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Eduard Pascual herenva...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
(at least for now: many RDFa-aware agents vs. zero HTML5's
microdata -aware agents)
HTML5 microdata parsers seem pretty trivial to write -
http://philip.html5.org/demos/microdata/demo.html is only about two
Philip Taylor wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 11:55 AM, Eduard Pascual herenva...@gmail.com wrote:
[...]
(at least for now: many RDFa-aware agents vs. zero HTML5's
microdata -aware agents)
HTML5 microdata parsers seem pretty trivial to write -
On Tue, 12 May 2009, Peter Mika wrote:
Just a quick comment on:
it uses prefixes, which most authors simply do not understand, and
which many implementors end up getting wrong (e.g. SearchMonkey
hard-coded certain prefixes in its first implementation, Google's
handling of RDF
Ian Hickson wrote:
On Tue, 12 May 2009, Peter Mika wrote:
Just a quick comment on:
it uses prefixes, which most authors simply do not understand, and
which many implementors end up getting wrong (e.g. SearchMonkey
hard-coded certain prefixes in its first implementation, Google's
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Shelley Powers
shell...@burningbird.net wrote:
I
would say if your fellow Google developers could understand how this all
works, there is hope for others.
if
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009May/0064.html
Shelley
- Sam Ruby
Sam Ruby wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Shelley Powers
shell...@burningbird.net wrote:
I
would say if your fellow Google developers could understand how this all
works, there is hope for others.
if
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009May/0064.html
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 10:21 PM, Sam Ruby ru...@intertwingly.net wrote:
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Shelley Powers
shell...@burningbird.net wrote:
I
would say if your fellow Google developers could understand how this all
works, there is hope for others.
if
Tab Atkins Jr. on Tue, 12 May 2009 12:30:27 -0500:
On Tue, May 12, 2009 at 5:55 AM, Eduard Pascual:
[...] It would be preferable to be able
to state something like each (row) tr in the table describes an
iguana: the imgs are each iguana's picture, the contents of the
a's are the names,
On Sun, 10 May 2009 12:32:34 +0200, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
Page 3:
h2My Catsh2
dl
dtSchrouml;dinger
dd item=com.damowmow.cat
meta property=com.damowmow.name content=Schrouml;dinger
meta property=com.damowmow.age content=9
p
Ian Hickson:
USE CASE: Annotate structured data that HTML has no semantics for, and
which nobody has annotated before, and may never again, for private use or
use in a small self-contained community.
(..)
SCENARIOS:
Between the scenarios should be considered also this case:
* a user
On Mon, May 11, 2009 at 6:15 PM, Giovanni Gentili
giovanni.gent...@gmail.com wrote:
* a user (or groups of users) wants to annotate
items present on a generic web page with
additional properties in a certain vocabulary.
for example Joe wants to gather in a blog
a series of personal annotation
A cursory glance on the new section 5 raises two questions on
indirection:
(Note the metas in the last example -- since sometimes the
information
isn't visible, rather than requiring that people put it in and hide it
with display:none, which has a rather poor accessibility story, I
One of the more elaborate use cases I collected from the e-mails sent in
over the past few months was the following:
USE CASE: Annotate structured data that HTML has no semantics for, and
which nobody has annotated before, and may never again, for private use or
use in a small
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
One of the more elaborate use cases I collected from the e-mails sent in
over the past few months was the following:
USE CASE: Annotate structured data that HTML has no semantics for, and
which nobody has annotated
Quoting Philip Taylor excors+wha...@gmail.com:
On Sun, May 10, 2009 at 11:32 AM, Ian Hickson i...@hixie.ch wrote:
One of the more elaborate use cases I collected from the e-mails sent in
over the past few months was the following:
USE CASE: Annotate structured data that HTML has no
52 matches
Mail list logo
