- From: Shelley Powers <shelley.just@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2009 08:53:51 -0600
- To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Cc: "Tab Atkins Jr." <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, public-html <public-html@w3.org>
On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 1:31 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote: > Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: >> >> On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 3:35 AM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> >> wrote: >>> >>> I don't think this position has consensus even among those who want to >>> keep >>> Microdata in the spec. It's simply impracticable. >> >> Eh, it makes sense to me, and it's Hixie's position as well. > > If Hixie has a position, I would prefer it he were to state it himself. > > As to whether or not it makes sense or not, I will step forward and say that > I suspect that I don't fully understand it. Let's start with the first > assertion: > >> All good specs which integrate with HTML5 should, ideally, be a part >> of HTML5. > > To my (perhaps naive) reading, that would mean either that many of the > following are not good specs: > > http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/references.html#references > > ... or it would mean that HTML5's current organization is not ideal. > > Care to comment? > > I will also note that a number of specs in that list that have Ian's name on > them, (example: http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-abarth-mime-sniff). > > - Sam Ruby > I wanted to note that though Ian didn't respond to this question directly in this thread, he did respond with his opinion of Microdata in another thread[1]. He said he doesn't like it. Shelley [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2009Dec/0186.html
Received on Sunday, 6 December 2009 14:54:31 UTC