[whatwg] RDFa Features
msporny at digitalbazaar.com
Thu Aug 28 22:32:37 PDT 2008
Kristof Zelechovski wrote:
> While Google owns the Web, it is not the core of the Web. If Google goes
> down, Google users cannot use Google any more. Sure, there are quite a few
> of them; but Google is a big fish accordingly.
> On the other hand, if Verizon or InterNIC goes down, we have a blackout,
> possibly with street riots and people plundering stores. That shows Verizon
> is an authority, Google is not, although, in general, Google is more useful.
> I believe in the general sanity in the architecture of the Web. I keep
> asking these questions because I would like it to stay.
Kristof - you will have to be more precise. Could you please outline (in
short form bulleted list), every specific issue that you have with RDFa.
A parallel short-form bulleted list of all RDFa features that you enjoy
would also be welcome. I believe that this thread has been going long
enough for you to formulate an educated opinion about what you do like
and what you don't like about RDFa. Getting such a list together will
also help us address your grievances better.
Here's an example of what I'd like to see:
- Allows semantic metadata markup in HTML family languages.
- Does not use QNames
- Mixes semantics with HTML structure
- Uses CURIEs to specify prefixes
- Does not work like CSS and does not re-use @class
and so on...
If any of you that have been involved in all of these discussions can
weight in with a list like that it would be very helpful. I can put
together a set of issues that the HTML5 community is concerned about and
we can start discussing them in the W3C RDFa Task Force.
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Bitmunk 3.0 Website Launches
More information about the whatwg