[ietf-calsify] Call for feedback on HTML5 spec on "predefined vocabularies"
lear at cisco.com
Fri Sep 18 08:37:41 PDT 2009
I recently had a thread with Julian in which he feels pretty strongly
about the below message regarding HTML5, and the vocabulary for
calendaring that is proposed. I suggest that people who are interested
review the proposed specification below and comment either on one of
these lists or to Julian directly.
On 8/10/09 2:21 PM, Julian Reschke wrote:
> (cross-posted to IETF apps-discuss, plus vcarddav and calsify mailing lists)
> the W3C HTML Working Group is currently preparing a new Working Draft
> for HTML5. This will be based on the current Editor's Draft at
> A significant change since the last Working Draft is the introduction of
> "microdata", a way to augment the markup with semantics, similar to and
> competing with RDFa and microformats in general (see
> As part of introducing microdata, the spec also defines several
> "predefined vocabularies". Some of them are based on IETF formats (and
> this is why I'm writing this particular email).
> One of these vocabularies is "vcard" (see
> <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#vcard>). As far as I can
> tell, the HTML spec more or less duplicates information from RFC 2426,
> and while doing so also introduces specific compliance criteria. It does
> *not* refer to
> <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-vcarddav-vcardrev-08>, so, as far
> as I can tell, it would hardwire the vocabulary to a soon-to-be-outdated
> version of the spec, and also removes the inherent extensibility model.
> Another predefined vocabulary is "vevent" (see
> <http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html#vevent>), to which similar
> observations apply.
> I have talked to this to many W3C and IETF people, and as far as I can
> tell, almost all of them consider this to be a Bad Idea. In particular,
> it seems that the author has not even tried to co-ordinate with the two
> applicable IETF Working Groups (I just checked the mailing list
> archives, and couldn't find anything, but maybe I'm missing something).
> I'm not sure whether the two working groups have considered this issue
> yet. I encourage to look at the spec now
> (<http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html>), or as soon as a new
> Working Draft is published.
> In case the Calsify and/or Vcarddav Working Groups want to comment on
> this, I encourage the chairs to send feedback directly to the W3C HTML
> WG, so that the feedback gets the proper attention.
> Best regards, Julian
> ietf-calsify mailing list
> ietf-calsify at osafoundation.org
More information about the ietf-calsify