17450 2012-06-09 09:30:08 +0000 This specification is bloody awful. It looks like it's been designed for the subset of computer programmers that get off on the sort of jargon-ridden computer documentation that only other hardcore computer programmers can read. In more everyday language 2012-06-12 06:12:37 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified HTML WG HTML Microdata (editor: Ian Hickson) unspecified Other other RESOLVED INVALID http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#top P3 normal --- 1 contributor ian glenn mike public-html-admin public-html-wg-issue-tracking public-html-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 68894 0 contributor 2012-06-09 09:30:08 +0000 Specification: http://dev.w3.org/html5/md/ Multipage: http://www.whatwg.org/C#top Complete: http://www.whatwg.org/c#top Comment: This specification is bloody awful. It looks like it's been designed for the subset of computer programmers that get off on the sort of jargon-ridden computer documentation that only other hardcore computer programmers can read. In more everyday language, this is what's known as "programmer-wank". Writing webpages is no longer an activity confined to the ranks of people with degrees in cybernetics. Little old ladies now write webpages to advertise their church fairs. If you want those people to write webpages that are more search-engine friendly, and that use more metadata, then you have to make an effort to make both the code and the documentation more readable and more accessible to a wider public. So far, this microdata effort fails miserably in that respect. "This section is non-normative". ??? If people can't write clear English, using a reasonable vocabulary, then they probably shouldn't be writing webpages for the public. And if they don't understand how to use language in a way that most people can understand, then they probably shouldn't be defining specifications and standards for how information is communicated. The web badly needs a microdata standard, but this isn't it. You should probably tear it up and start again. Next time, please try to do it properly, otherwise we'll just have to abandon the W3C and hand the job over to an outside party. Posted from: 188.29.112.212 User agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:12.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/12.0 68943 1 glenn 2012-06-12 06:12:37 +0000 true, but irrelevant