Ben Adida ha scritto:
Tab Atkins Jr. wrote:
Actually, SearchMonkey is an excellent use case, and provides a
problem statement.
I'm surprised, but very happily so, that you agree.
My confusion stems from the fact that Ian clearly mentioned SearchMonkey
in his email a few days ago, then proceeded to say it wasn't a good use
case.
-Ben
It seems to me that's a very custom use case - though requiring metadata
to be embedded in a big number of pages, but that's an optional
requirement, because search results don't rely only on metadata - since
metadata are used as an optional source for informations by the server
and don't require any collaboration by other kinds of UA (excluding, at
most, some custom data services - whereas, for instance, a search engine
using the mark element to highlight a keyword would require a client UA
to understand and style it properly -- I expect it not to be working on
IE6, for instance, because IEx browsers deal with unknown elements as if
their content where misplaced). That is, Yahoo might develop his own
data model and work fine with sites implementing it; perhaps RDF(a) was
chosen because they might think RDF is a natural way to model data which
are sparse in a web page (and re-mapping microformats on RDF might
result in an easier implementation); anyway, in this case the only UA
needing to understand RDFa, in this case, is SearchMonkey itself, thus a
client browser might just drop RDFa attributes without breaking
SearchMonkey functionalities -- at least, this is my first impression.
Furthermore, it's a very recent (yet potentially interesting)
application, so why not to wait and see how it grows, if the opt-in
mechanism will effectively prevent spam (e.g. spammers might model data
basing on widely diffused vocabularies and data services, and find a way
to make such data available in searches when users asks for additional
infos, for instance through an ad within a page of an accomplice author,
or exploiting some kind of errors in authors' selection of URLs to be
crawled for metadata, or the alike), or just which model become the most
used among RDFa, eRDF, Microformats, Atom embedding dataRSS and whatever
else Yahoo might decide to support, before choosing to include one or
the other into html5 specification (or to include each one because
equally diffused)? Moreover, it seems that some xml processing is needed
to create a custom data service, thus it might be natural to use xhtml
(possibly along with namespaces and prefixed attributes) to provide
metadata to such a data service, which might rely on an xml parser
instead of implementing one from scratch (and html parser might not
support namespaces for the purpose to expose them through DOM
interfaces, as I understand html serialization) -- the use of prefixed
RDFa attributes, or perhaps even unprefixed ones, within an
xml-serialized document, shouldn't require a formalization in html5
spec, as far as there is no strict requirement for UAs to support RDF
processing - as it is for the purposes of SearchMonkey and its related
data services.
WBR, Alex
--
Caselle da 1GB, trasmetti allegati fino a 3GB e in piu' IMAP, POP3 e SMTP
autenticato? GRATIS solo con Email.it http://www.email.it/f
Sponsor:
Con Danone Activia, puoi vincere cellulari Nokia e Macbook Air. Scopri come
Clicca qui: http://adv.email.it/cgi-bin/foclick.cgi?mid=8551&d=9-1
