Re: New round of Working Drafts (was Re: New split-out drafts)

Previous Topic Next Topic
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view

Re: New round of Working Drafts (was Re: New split-out drafts)

Manu Sporny
On 01/29/2010 09:23 PM, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> Thus, I think both HTML Microdata and HTML+RDFa should simply
> say: "The publication of this document by the W3C as a W3C Working Draft
> does not imply endorsement by the W3C HTML Working Group or the W3C as a
> whole."


> I think likewise the corresponding sentence in HTML+RDFa should cite
> joint development with the RDFa Task Force rather than claiming external
> development. There has been much technical feedback in the HTML WG on
> that draft as well.


> Paul Cotton wrote:
> Given that we are about to publish a separate W3C WD for Microdata
> [see], I would like to suggest that this
> link be changed to point to that separate W3C WD.  I expect that this
> kind of change will have to be made later in the publication process
> when the link to the Microdata FPWD on the TR page is finalized.

Changed. The [microdata] link points to the following URL now:

While this link doesn't exist right now, I'm expecting the short-name
that is chosen to be "microdata". If it ends up being something
different, we were going to have to change the link at the time of
publication anyway.

The new HTML+RDFa draft is available here:

Diffs are here:

-- manu

Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Monarch - Next Generation REST Web Services