13314 2011-07-20 20:11:48 +0000 Drop RDF conversion algorithm 2011-08-11 22:31:05 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified HTML WG LC1 HTML Microdata (editor: Ian Hickson) unspecified PC All RESOLVED FIXED P2 normal --- 13374 13466 1 ian ian ayg ian kennyluck mike msporny philipj public-html-admin public-html-wg-issue-tracking public-html-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 51338 0 ian 2011-07-20 20:11:48 +0000 As per suggestion in this post, consider dropping the RDF stuff altogether: https://plus.google.com/115203359751471044302/posts/92VKitpppB4 51352 1 ayg 2011-07-21 19:39:59 +0000 Of course, the RDF people would still be free to define their own algorithm, perhaps based on the current one. It makes sense for RDF users to decide what sort of microdata conversion algorithm works best for them, since they'll be the ones using the output. 51415 2 philipj 2011-07-24 07:26:41 +0000 https://github.com/gkellogg/rdf-microdata is the first non-spec converter that I'm aware of. It suffers from the conflicts that the ugly predicate URIs are designed to avoid, but if people want URIs that are nice to look at, that's what they get. If you drop the RDF conversion, don't forget to drop the ban on "http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/microdata#" for itemprop tokens. 51418 3 msporny 2011-07-24 13:42:23 +0000 FWIW, I think that it would be a good idea to drop RDF conversion for Microdata. Traditionally, the RDF conversion algorithm for Microdata has always generated really strange property IRIs for non-absolute-IRI properties. That is, the IRIs generated in the RDF conversion algorithm for @itemprop in Microdata do not meet the expectations of those working with all other data in RDF. This may help differentiate Microdata and RDFa enough to reduce concerns that the W3C TAG has around Microdata and RDFa. 52977 4 mike 2011-08-04 05:05:47 +0000 mass-move component to LC1 54746 5 ian 2011-08-11 22:31:05 +0000 EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Accepted Change Description: see diff given below Rationale: Concurred with reporter's comments.