Archive for 2012

Objection to Microdata Candidate Recommendation

Full disclosure: I’m the current chair of the standards group at the World Wide Web Consortium that created the newest version of RDFa, editor of the HTML5+RDFa 1.1 and RDFa Lite 1.1 specifications, and I’m also a member of the HTML Working Group.

Edit: 2012-12-01 – Updated the article to rephrase some things, and include rationale and counter-arguments at the bottom in preparation for the HTML WG poll on the matter.

The HTML Working Group at the W3C is currently trying to decide if they should transition the Microdata specification to the next stage in the standardization process. There has been a call for consensus to transition the spec to the Candidate Recommendation stage. The problem is that we already have a set of specifications that are official W3C recommendations that do what Microdata does and more. RDFa 1.1 became an official W3C Recommendation last summer. From a standards perspective, this is a mistake and sends a confused signal to Web developers. Officially supporting two specification that do almost exactly the same thing in almost exactly the same way is, ultimately, a failure to standardize.

The fact that RDFa already does what Microdata does has been elaborated upon before:

Mythical Differences: RDFa Lite vs. Microdata
An Uber-comparison of RDFa, Microdata, and Microformats

Here’s the problem in a nutshell: The W3C is thinking of ratifying two completely different specifications that accomplish the same thing in basically the same way. The functionality of RDFa, which is already a W3C Recommendation, overlaps Microdata by a large margin. In fact, RDFa Lite 1.1 was developed as a plug-in replacement for Microdata. The full version of RDFa can also do a number of things that Microdata cannot, such as datatyping, associating more than one type per object, embed-ability in languages other than HTML, ability to easily publish and mix vocabularies, etc.

Microdata would have easily been dead in the water had it not been for two simple facts: 1) The editor of the specification works at Google, and 2) Google pushed Microdata as the markup language for schema.org before also accepting RDFa markup. The first enabled Google and the editor to work on schema.org without signalling to the public that it was creating a competitor to Facebook’s Open Graph Protocol. The second gave Microdata enough of a jump start to establish a foothold for schema.org markup. There have been a number of studies that show that Microdata’s sole use case (99% of Microdata markup) is for the markup of schema.org terms. Microdata is not widely used outside of that context, we now have data to back up what we had predicted would happen when schema.org made their initial announcement for Microdata-only support. Note that schema.org now supports both RDFa and Microdata.

It is typically a bad idea to have two formats published by the same organization that do the same thing. It leads to Web developer confusion surrounding which format to use. One of the goals of Web standards is to reduce, or preferably eliminate, the confusion surrounding the correct technology decision to make. The HTML Working Group and the W3C is failing miserably on this front. There is more confusion today about picking Microdata or RDFa because they accomplish the same thing in effectively the same way. The only reason both exist is due to political reasons.

If we step back and look at the technical arguments, there is no compelling reason that Microdata should be a W3C Recommendation. There is no compelling reason to have two specifications that do the same thing in basically the same way. Therefore, as a member of the HTML Working Group (not as a chair or editor of RDFa) I object to the publication of Microdata as a Candidate Recommendation.

Note that this is not a W3C formal objection. This is an informal objection to publish Microdata along the Recommendation track. This objection will not become an official W3C formal objection if the HTML Working Group holds a poll to gather consensus around whether Microdata should proceed along the Recommendation publication track. I believe the publication of a W3C Note will continue to allow Google to support Microdata in schema.org, but will hopefully correct the confused message that the W3C has been sending to Web developers regarding RDFa and Microdata. We don’t need two specifications that do almost exactly the same thing.

The message sent by the W3C needs to be very clear: There is one recommendation for doing structured data markup in HTML. That recommendation is RDFa. It addresses all of the use cases that have been put forth by the general Web community, and it’s ready for broad adoption and implementation today.

If you agree with this blog post, make sure to let the HTML Working Group know that you do not think that the W3C should ratify two specifications that do almost exactly the same thing in almost exactly the same way. Now is the time to speak up!

Summary of Facts and Arguments

Below is a summary of arguments presented as a basis for publishing Microdata along the W3C Note track:

  1. RDFa 1.1 is already a ratified Web standard as of June 7th 2012 and absorbed almost every Microdata feature before it became official. If the majority of the differences between RDFa and Microdata boil down to different attribute names (property vs. itemprop), then the two solutions have effectively converged on syntax and W3C should not ratify two solutions that do effectively the same thing in almost exactly the same way.
  2. RDFa is supported by all of the major search crawlers, including Google (and schema.org), Microsoft, Yahoo!, Yandex, and Facebook. Microdata is not supported by Facebook.
  3. RDFa Lite 1.1 is feature-equivalent to Microdata. Over 99% of Microdata markup can be expressed easily in RDFa Lite 1.1. Converting from Microdata to RDFa Lite is as simple as a search and replace of the Microdata attributes with RDFa Lite attributes. Conversely, Microdata does not support a number of the more advanced RDFa features, like being able to tell the difference between feet and meters.
  4. You can mix vocabularies with RDFa Lite 1.1, supporting both schema.org and Facebook’s Open Graph Protocol (OGP) using a single markup language. You don’t have to learn Microdata for schema.org and RDFa for Facebook – just use RDFa for both.
  5. The creator of the Microdata specification doesn’t like Microdata. When people are not passionate about the solutions that they create, the desire to work on those solutions and continue improve upon them is muted. The RDFa community is passionate about the technology that they have created together and have strived to make it better since the standardization of RDFa 1.0 back in 2008.
  6. RDFa Lite 1.1 is fully upward-compatible with RDFa 1.1, allowing you to seamlessly migrate to a more feature-rich language as your Linked Data needs grow. Microdata does not support any of the more advanced features provided by RDFa 1.1.
  7. RDFa deployment is broader than Microdata. RDFa deployment continues to grow at a rapid pace.
  8. The economic damage generated by publishing both RDFa and Microdata along the Recommendation track should not be underestimated. W3C should try to provide clear direction in an attempt to reduce the economic waste that a “let the market sort it out among two nearly identical solutions” strategy will generate. At some point, the market will figure out that both solutions are nearly identical, but only after publishing and building massive amounts of content and tooling for both.
  9. The W3C Technical Architecture Group (TAG), which is responsible for ensuring that the core architecture of the Web is sound, has raised their concern about the publication of both Microdata and RDFa as recommendations. After the W3C TAG raised their concerns, the RDFa Working Group created RDFa Lite 1.1 to be a near feature-equivalent replacement for Microdata that was also backwards-compatible with RDFa 1.0.
  10. Publishing a standard that does almost exactly the same thing as an existing standard in almost exactly the same way is a failure to standardize.

Counter-arguments and Rebuttals

[This is a] classic case of monopolistic anti-competitive protectionism.

No, this is an objection to publishing two specifications that do almost exactly the same thing in almost exactly the same way along the W3C Recommendation publication track. Protectionism would have asked that all work on Microdata be stopped and the work scuttled. The proposed resolution does not block anybody from using Microdata, nor does it try to stop or block the Microdata work from happening in the HTML WG. The objection asks that the W3C decide what the best path forward for Web developers is based on a fairly complicated set of predicted outcomes. This is not an easy decision. The objection is intended to ensure that the HTML Working Group has this discussion before we proceed to Candidate Recommendation with Microdata.

<manu1> I'd like the W3C to work as well, and I think publishing two specs that accomplish basically 
        the same thing in basically the same way shows breakage.
<annevk> Bit late for that. XDM vs DOM, XPath vs Selectors, XSL-FO vs CSS, XSLT vs XQuery, 
         XQuery vs XQueryX, RDF/XML vs Turtle, XForms vs Web Forms 2.0, 
         XHTML 1.0 vs HTML 4.01, XML 1.0 4th Edition vs XML 1.0 5th Edition, 
         XML 1.0 vs XML 1.1, etc.

[link to full conversation]

While W3C does have a history of publishing competing specifications, there have been features in each competing specification that were compelling enough to warrant the publication of both standards. For example, XHTML 1.0 provided a standard set of rules for validating documents that was aligned with XML and a decentralized extension mechanism that HTML4.01 did not. Those two major features were viewed as compelling enough to publish both specifications as Recommendations via W3C.

For authors, the differences between RDFa and Microdata are so small that, for 99% of documents in the wild, you can convert a Microdata document to an RDFa Lite 1.1 document with a simple search and replace of attribute names. That demonstrates that the syntaxes for both languages are different only in the names of the HTML attributes, and that does not seem like a very compelling reason to publish both specifications as Recommendations.

Microdata’s processing algorithm is vastly simpler, which makes the data
extracted more reliable and, when something does go wrong, makes it easier for 1) users to debug their own data, and 2) easier for me to debug it if they can’t figure it out on their own.

Microdata’s processing algorithm is simpler for two major reasons:

The complexity of implementing a processor has little bearing on how easy it is for developers to author documents. For example, XHTML 1.0 had a simpler processing model which made the data that was extracted more reliable and when something went wrong, it was easier to debug. However, HTML5 supported more use cases and recovers from errors in cases where it can, which made it more popular with Web developers in the long-run.

Additionally, authors of Microdata and RDFa should be using tools like RDFa Play to debug their markup. This is true for any Web technology. We debug our HTML, JavaScript, and CSS by loading it into a browser and bringing up the debugging tools. This is no different for Microdata and RDFa. If you want to make sure your markup does what you want, make sure to verify it by using a tool and not by trying to memorize the processing rules and running them through your head.

For what it is worth, I personally think RDFa is generally a technically better solution. But as Marcos says, “so what”? Our job at W3C is to make standards for the technology the market decides to use.

If we think one of these technologies is a technically better solution than the other one, we should signal that realization at some level. The most basic thing we could do is to make one an official Recommendation, and the other a Note. I also agree that our job at W3C is to make standards that the technology market decides to use, but clearly this particular case isn’t that cut-and-dried. Schema.org’s only option in the beginning was to use Microdata, and since authors didn’t want to risk not showing up in the search engines, they used Microdata. This forced the market to go in one direction.

This discussion would be in a different place had Google kept the playing field level. That is not to say that Google didn’t have good reasons for making the decisions that they did at the time, but those reasons influenced the development of RDFa, and RDFa Lite 1.1 was the result. The differences between Microdata and RDFa have been removed and a new question is in front of us: given two almost identical technologies, should the W3C publish two specifications that do almost exactly the same thing in almost exactly the same way?

… the [HTML] Working Group explicitly decided not to pick a winner between HTML Microdata and HTML+RDFa

The question before the HTML WG at the time was whether or not to split Microdata out of the HTML5 specification. The HTML Working Group did not discuss whether the publishing track for the Microdata document should be the W3C Note track or the W3C Recommendation track. At the time the decision was made, RDFa Lite 1.1 did not exist, RDFa Lite 1.1 was not a W3C Recommendation, nor did the RDFa and Microdata functionality so greatly overlap as they do now. Additionally, the HTML WG decision at that time states the following under the “Revisiting the issue” section:

“If Microdata and RDFa converge in syntax…”

Microdata and RDFa have effectively converged in syntax. Since Microdata can be interpreted as RDFa based on a simple search-and-replace of attributes that the languages have effectively converged on syntax except for the attribute names. The proposal is not to have work on Microdata stopped. Let work on Microdata proceed in this group, but let it proceed on the W3C Note publication track.

Closing Statements

I felt uneasy raising this issue because it’s a touchy and painful subject for everyone involved. Even if the discussion is painful, it is a healthy one for a standardization body to have from time to time. What I wanted was for the HTML Working Group to have this discussion. If the upcoming poll finds that the consensus of the HTML Working Group is to continue with the Microdata specification along the Recommendation track, I will not pursue a W3C Formal Objection. I will respect whatever decision the HTML Working Group makes as I trust the Chairs of that group, the process that they’ve put in place, and the aggregate opinion of the members in that group. After all, that is how the standardization process is supposed to work and I’m thankful to be a part of it.

The Problem with RDF and Nuclear Power

Full disclosure: I am the chair of the RDFa Working Group, the JSON-LD Community Group, a member of the RDF Working Group, as well as other Semantic Web initiatives. I believe in this stuff, but am critical about the path we’ve been taking for a while now.

The Resource Description Framework (a model for publishing data on the Web) has this horrible public perception akin to how many people in the USA view nuclear power. The coal industry campaigned quite aggressively to implant the notion that nuclear power was not as safe as coal. Couple this public misinformation campaign with a few nuclear-power-related catastrophes and it is no surprise that the current public perception toward nuclear power can be summarized as: “Not in my back yard”. Nevermind that, per tera-watt, nuclear power generation has killed far fewer people since its inception than coal. Nevermind that it is one of the more viable power sources if we gaze hundreds of years into Earth’s future, especially with the recent renewed interest in Liquid Flouride Thorium Reactors. When we look toward the future, the path is clear, but public perception is preventing us from proceeding down that path at the rate that we need to in order to prevent more damage to the Earth.

RDF shares a number of these similarities with nuclear power. RDF is one of the best data modeling mechanisms that humanity has created. Looking into the future, there is no equally-powerful, viable alternative. So, why has progress been slow on this very exciting technology? There was no public mis-information campaign, so where did this negative view of RDF come from?

In short, RDF/XML was the Semantic Web’s 3 Mile Island incident. When it was released, developers confused RDF/XML (bad) with the RDF data model (good). There weren’t enough people and time to counter-act the negative press that RDF was receiving as a result of RDF/XML and thus, we are where we are today because of this negative perception of RDF. Even Wikipedia’s page on the matter seems to imply that RDF/XML is RDF. Some purveyors of RDF think that the public perception problem isn’t that bad. I think that when developers hear RDF, they think: “Not in my back yard”.

The solution to this predicament: Stop mentioning RDF and the Semantic Web. Focus on tools for developers. Do more dogfooding.

To explain why we should adopt this strategy, we can look to Tesla for inspiration. Elon Musk, founder of PayPal and now the CEO of Tesla Motors, recently announced the Tesla Supercharger project. At a high-level, the project accomplishes the following jaw-dropping things:

  1. It creates a network of charging stations for electric cars that are capable of charging a Tesla in less than 30 minutes.
  2. The charging stations are solar powered and generate more electricity than the cars use, feeding the excess power into the local power grid.
  3. The charging stations are free to use for any person that owns a Tesla vehicle.
  4. The charging stations are operational and available today.

This means that, in 4-5 years, any owner of a Tesla vehicle be able to drive anywhere in the USA, for free, powered by the sun. No person in their right mind (with the money) would pass up that offer. No fossil fuel-based company will ever be able to provide “free”, clean energy. This is the sort of proposition we, the RDF/Linked Data/Semantic Web community, need to make; I think we can re-position ourselves to do just that.

Here is what the RDF and Linked Data community can learn from Tesla:

  1. The message shouldn’t be about the technology. It should be about the problems we have today and a concrete solution on how to address those problems.
  2. Demonstrate real value. Stop talking about the beauty of RDF, theoretical value, or design. Deliver production-ready, open-source software tools.
  3. Build a network of believers by spending more of your time working with Web developers and open-source projects to convince them to publish Linked Data. Dogfood our work.

Here is how we’ve applied these lessons to the JSON-LD work:

  1. We don’t mention RDF in the specification, unless absolutely necessary, and in many cases it isn’t necessary. RDF is plumbing, it’s in the background, and developers don’t need to know about it to use JSON-LD.
  2. We purposefully built production-ready tools for JSON-LD from day one; a playground, multiple production-ready implementations, and a JavaScript implementation of the browser-based API.
  3. We are working with Wikidata, Wikimedia, Drupal, the Web Payments and Read Write Web groups at W3C, and a number of other private clients to ensure that we’re providing real value and dogfooding our work.

Ultimately, RDF and the Semantic Web are of no interest to Web developers. They also have a really negative public perception problem. We should stop talking about them. Let’s shift the focus to be on Linked Data, explaining the problems that Web developers face today, and concrete, demonstrable solutions to those problems.

Note: This post isn’t meant as a slight against any one person or group. I was just working on the JSON-LD spec, aggressively removing prose discussing RDF, and the analogy popped into my head. This blog post was an exercise in organizing my thoughts on the matter.

HTML5 and RDFa 1.1

Full disclosure: I’m the chair of the newly re-chartered RDFa Working Group at the W3C as well as a member of the HTML WG.

The newly re-chartered RDFa Working Group at the W3C published a First Public Working Draft of HTML5+RDFa 1.1 today. This might be confusing to those of you that have been following the RDFa specifications. Keep in mind that HTML5+RDFa 1.1 is different from XHTML+RDFa 1.1, RDFa Core 1.1, and RDFa Lite 1.1 (which are official specs at this point). This is specifically about HTML5 and RDFa 1.1. The HTML5+RDFa 1.1 spec reached Last Call (aka: almost done) status at W3C via the HTML Working Group last year. So, why are we doing this now and what does it mean for the future of RDFa in HTML5?

Here’s the issue: the document was being unnecessarily held up by the HTML5 specification. In the most favorable scenario, HTML5 is expected to become an official standard in 2014. RDFa Core 1.1 became an official standard in June 2012. Per the W3C process, HTML5+RDFa 1.1 would have had to wait until 2014 to become an official W3C specification, even though it would be ready to go in a few months from now. W3C policy states that all specs that your spec depends on must reach the official spec status before your spec becomes official. Since HTML5+RDFa 1.1 is a language profile for RDFa 1.1 that is layered on top of HTML5, it had no choice but to wait for HTML5 to become official. Boo.

Thankfully the chairs of the HTML WG, RDFa WG, and W3C staff found an alternate path forward for HTML5+RDFa 1.1. Since the specification doesn’t depend on any “at risk” features in HTML5, and since all of the features that RDFa 1.1 uses in HTML5 have been implemented in all of the Web browsers, there is very little chance that those features will be removed in the future. This means that HTML5+RDFa 1.1 could become an official W3C specification before HTML5 reaches that status. So, that’s what we’re going to try to do. Here’s the plan:

  1. Get approval from W3C member companies to re-charter the RDFa WG to take over publishing responsibility of HTML5+RDFa 1.1. [Done]
  2. Publish the HTML5+RDFa 1.1 specification under the newly re-chartered RDFa WG. [Done]
  3. Start the clock on a new patent exclusion period and resolve issues. Wait a minimum of 6 months to go to W3C Candidate Recommendation (feature freeze) status, due to patent policy requirements.
  4. Fast-track to an official W3C specification (test suite is already done, inter-operable implementations are already done).

There are a few minor issues that still need to be ironed out, but the RDFa WG is on the job and those issues will get resolved in the next month or two. If everything goes according to plan, we should be able to publish HTML5+RDFa 1.1 as an official W3C standard in 7-9 months. That’s good for RDFa, good for Web Developers, and good for the Web.

HTML5+RDFa 1.1 published – pla…

HTML5+RDFa 1.1 published – plan to become official spec in 7 months! http://t.co/oCx8YS7S #w3c #html5 #rdfa

A very moving Haka performed f…

A very moving Haka performed for fallen soldiers in New Zealand (video): http://t.co/wxHhs4Of #visceral #haka #nz #kiwi

If you didn’t see Bill Clinton…

If you didn’t see Bill Clinton’s speech at the DNC, it was fantastically precise: http://t.co/lNBy5rSG #dnc #math #greatspeech

@rouninmedia Thanks – glad you…

@rouninmedia Thanks – glad you discovered RDFa and all the great work (and people) behind it. #w3c #rdfa

RT @rouninmedia: no need to le…

RT @rouninmedia: no need to learn Microdata for http://t.co/KJRNfw8o & RDFa for FB OpenGraph. RDFa suffices. Here comes the Semantic Web.

New RDFa WG publishes HTML5+RD…

New RDFa WG publishes HTML5+RDFa 1.1, intends to go to REC in 8-9 months: http://t.co/MdnJ2RAu #w3c #rdfa #html5

o_O – Have you /seen/ Michelle…

o_O – Have you /seen/ Michelle Obama’s speech!? Totally blows the doors off of every Obama speech ever given: http://t.co/Vq1LAqZQ

Occupy Wall Street Tech Workin…

Occupy Wall Street Tech Working Group drops by to chat with W3C Web Payments Working Group: http://t.co/vAbh8Wfu #ows #w3c #payswarm

JSON-LD group discusses NoSQL …

JSON-LD group discusses NoSQL talk, RDF terminology, syntax intro, and future of .flatten()/.frame(): http://t.co/fonVXXDH #w3c #jsonld

Web Foundation releases global…

Web Foundation releases global stats on the Web’s growth, utility and impact on people & nations: http://t.co/cpL4435S /via @timberners_lee

RT @ivan_herman: RDFa, microda…

RT @ivan_herman: RDFa, microdata, turtle-in-HTML, and RDFLib http://t.co/yS9YRYgF

@venessamiemis Happy birthday!…

@venessamiemis Happy birthday! Hope your weekend will be filled with celebrating. :)

@benadida congrats on your new…

@benadida congrats on your new little one (and your AMAZING SAVINGS!) – hope each of you are doing well – all the best.

Tea-partier picks fight with I…

Tea-partier picks fight with Irish president (2010), does not go well: http://t.co/htzV7EVu /via Nadine Hack

"Let’s build a goddamn Te…

“Let’s build a goddamn Tesla Museum” raises $1M in 8 days via Matt Inmann (The Oatmeal) & Indiegogo: http://t.co/Sg6TutHJ #tesla

Foul mouthed grannies let Akin…

Foul mouthed grannies let Akin really know how they feel about his “legitimate rape” comments: http://t.co/XUostHah #nomeansno #akin

@agebhard blame the people wit…

@agebhard blame the people with the opinions… besides, you should know better than to abet a religious war before getting on a plane. :)

@sideshowbarker … and browse…

@sideshowbarker … and browser manufacturers have stated very clearly that they’re not interested in an RDFa API.

@sideshowbarker JSON-LD API: h…

@sideshowbarker JSON-LD API: http://t.co/IiegGQtN (the issue is: browser manufacturers don’t care yet…)

@sideshowbarker I was kidding….

@sideshowbarker I was kidding… note the “:P *ducks*” in the o.p. <– This is why I’m not involved in governmental politics. /cc @danbri

Go see this! RT @gkellogg: Tal…

Go see this! RT @gkellogg: Talking about publishing structured data from wikis today at 2:00pm. #jsonld #mongodb #nosqlnow

+1 RT @gkellogg: I agree that …

+1 RT @gkellogg: I agree that #microdata made #rdfa better. Now that’s done, its time to move on and get with RDFa.

My new hobby: Trolling @danbri…

My new hobby: Trolling @danbri on Twitter. :P /cc @agebhard @scorlosquet @gkellogg

@danbri @gkellogg @scorlosquet…

@danbri @gkellogg @scorlosquet @agebhard RDFa is better than Microdata, that’s a fact. :P *ducks*

Great post on JSON-LD, MongoDB…

Great post on JSON-LD, MongoDB, & MediaWiki/Wikia: http://t.co/kE5S5JBW /by @gkellogg /via @ivan_herman #mongo #wiki #w3c #jsonld

@danbri @agebhard @scorlosquet…

@danbri @agebhard @scorlosquet Yes, absolutely! What Stephane said. (although, there were better ways of approaching that issue). :)

@danbri My point still stands …

@danbri My point still stands – no good technical reason to use Microdata.

@danbri That said, we’ve seen …

@danbri That said, we’ve seen very little interest in an in-browser API to extract metadata – that’s why we didn’t pursue that route.

@danbri Is there any large dep…

@danbri Is there any large deployment of the Microdata API? RDFa API is going to be RDFa -> JSON-LD, and we’re working on it.

@agebhard I agree. That said, …

@agebhard I agree. That said, now that RDFa Lite 1.1 exists – there is no good technical reason for Microdata: http://t.co/suLnJ1MQ

RT @bergie: still unconvinced …

RT @bergie: still unconvinced of the necessity for #Microdata in a #RDFa world, despite @linclark ‘s excellent #DrupalCon session

Earthworm-like robot oozes alo…

Earthworm-like robot oozes along ground, can survive sledgehammers and stomping from puny humans: http://t.co/KXp7ZuxP #mit #robotics

Autonomous robotic plane flies…

Autonomous robotic plane flies indoors, through parking garage at 10m/s: http://t.co/CgSEUI2O #mit #uav

@aymericbrisse it was, we took…

@aymericbrisse it was, we took care of it. Shouldn’t happen again (hopefully)

JSON-LD group discusses Drupal…

JSON-LD group discusses Drupal 8 support, optional features, property generators, language maps: http://t.co/UNyPT9r1 #w3c #jsonld

Web Payments group discusses p…

Web Payments group discusses payment code example, PaySwarm Alpha 4 release, HTML5 WebApp store: http://t.co/OKkL3312 #w3c #payswarm

PaySwarm Alpha 4 released (sup…

PaySwarm Alpha 4 released (support for HTML5 Web App stores, new release process, bug fixes): http://t.co/6ymrEvVR #w3c #payswarm

Brilliant talk by Nick Hanauer…

Brilliant talk by Nick Hanauer on the true job creators: http://t.co/bUILUBCx #ted #middle #class

Summary of all JSON-LD specifi…

Summary of all JSON-LD specification updates that have happened in the last month: http://t.co/VmDGaVyd #w3c #jsonld

RT @ptwobrussell: If true, thi…

RT @ptwobrussell: If true, this is unbelievably despicable: This is how Visa works: http://t.co/cXCmRlVk /via @rands

PaySwarm Alpha 4 released – su…

PaySwarm Alpha 4 released – support HTML5 app stores, new build system, bug fixes: http://t.co/OTEQ7Iw0 #w3c #payswarm

"Researching" HTML5 …

“Researching” HTML5 games at work… RAPT is awesome (as long as you have a friend you can play it with): http://t.co/uqcb6Qk1

RT @niklasl: I’m well on the w…

RT @niklasl: I’m well on the way towards implementing a redesigned RDFa DOM API: http://t.co/9Fon3Ryz Live updates, not triple-centric.

RT @danbri: We’re close to bei…

RT @danbri: We’re close to being able to round-trip the http://t.co/KJRNfw8o site through RDFa 1.1 #html5 #google #seo #rdfa

FACT: All dogs in Ukraine are …

FACT: All dogs in Ukraine are trained in Parkour from an early age: http://t.co/jtdVLEMa /via @bsletten #parkour #dogs #ukraine

Call Me Maybe + Chatroulette +…

Call Me Maybe + Chatroulette + Cross Dressing == http://t.co/T0t9dFRD #party

PaySwarm Alpha 3 released – W3…

PaySwarm Alpha 3 released – W3C Web Payments reference implementation nears commercialization: http://t.co/eQTET8LU #payswarm #w3c

W3C RDFa Working Group plans t…

W3C RDFa Working Group plans to take HTML5+RDFa to official standard in the next six months: http://t.co/m3CmMF6I #w3c #html5 #rdfa

@cygri while not perfect, I th…

@cygri while not perfect, I think this is a solid step forward: http://t.co/cN54FmhT #rdf #vocab #docs

RT @thelal: @payswarm = Univer…

RT @thelal: @payswarm = Universal #Payment Standard for the #Web and the New Economy http://t.co/IBjk5VPs #futureofmoney

Web Payments group discusses d…

Web Payments group discusses decentralized HTML5 Web App stores, listing assets for sale: http://t.co/kXqI101m #w3c #html5 #payswarm

W3C JSON-LD group discusses pr…

W3C JSON-LD group discusses pre-processing JSON, synchronous API, array-position-based properties: http://t.co/diGkWb9S #jsonld #w3c

If you missed the Curiosity to…

If you missed the Curiosity touchdown on Mars – here’s a video of what happened: http://t.co/uvurdKnB #drama #ridiculous #awesome

Watch live as Curiosity lands …

Watch live as Curiosity lands on Mars in 75 minutes – 10:30pm PST, 1:30am EST – live stream here: http://t.co/CpviIApr #msl

Why men can’t have it all: htt…

Why men can’t have it all: http://t.co/7zfeAu1L /via @pemo #fatherhood #startups

Current corporate office statu…

Current corporate office status: Gangnam Style – http://t.co/26KZ0pbG #korea #horse #dancing #techno

RT @doriantaylor: Paywalls are…

RT @doriantaylor: Paywalls are awesome because they are super effective reminders that I have better things to do with my time.

@edithyeung Great chatting wit…

@edithyeung Great chatting with you too – glad to hear about http://t.co/9UCLgdwv fighting for developers and the Web! :)

RT @edithyeung: @manusporny Gr…

RT @edithyeung: @manusporny Great chatting with you! :) You guys are doing some exciting @w3c stuff for payment! http://t.co/5sfzbsJA

JSON-LD support for Wikidata /…

JSON-LD support for Wikidata / Drupal 8 REST APIs (internationalization support): http://t.co/TNrOzcle /cc @Dries #jsonld #w3c

JavaScript on V8 now firmly ki…

JavaScript on V8 now firmly kicking PHP, Ruby, Python, and Perl’s keister: http://t.co/PMhtDBww /via @davegeist #programming

Bruce Schneier on the Aurora s…

Bruce Schneier on the Aurora shootings and ‘security theatre’: http://t.co/cXd3gCS2 /via @davegeist #usa #guns #security

Favorite quote of the day: &qu…

Favorite quote of the day: “By all measures, @scorlosquet is a semantic web bad ass.”: http://t.co/4Bl4y7Pl #rdfa #w3c #schema

Phase2 integrates RDFa, rNews …

Phase2 integrates RDFa, rNews & http://t.co/KJRNfw8o into publishing platform 4 news sites: http://t.co/XGA1Z6zJ #rdfa #rnews #w3c

@openpublish online publishing…

@openpublish online publishing platform improves RDFa support in Drupal 7: http://t.co/IhxN5nsG #rdfa #drupal

"…a vast porno cluster …

“…a vast porno cluster can be seen between Brazil and Japan…”: http://t.co/D4ArWcjJ #ohinternetyousofunny

A Google maps-like map of the …

A Google maps-like map of the Web: http://t.co/ZyLVK6Ev /via @webr3 #web #science

The dark future of retinal dis…

The dark future of retinal displays and biomods: http://t.co/PkiRXDbo /via +Gregory Esau #film #hmm

"OAuth 2.0… the biggest…

“OAuth 2.0… the biggest professional disappointment of my career.” — Eran Hammer, resigns as lead of OAuth: http://t.co/2vos4hT2

@agebhard I’ll see what I can …

@agebhard I’ll see what I can pull together for you… :P

"GNOME3 turned that stupi…

“GNOME3 turned that stupid up to eleven” — on how the Gnome project is dying: http://t.co/O3OxlZWI

@agebhard I could hire some cl…

@agebhard I could hire some clowns and juggle baby chicks while singing “Poker Face”… if that would help re-infuse some randomness?

pic of plane crash showing pil…

pic of plane crash showing pilot/passenger getting stuff out of the plane: http://t.co/kG3sB8Te

whoa – plane just buzzed 100ft…

whoa – plane just buzzed 100ft over the office, crashed on the other side of building – pilot/passenger OK – caught by the chain link fence.

Femto-photography – imaging at…

Femto-photography – imaging at a trillion frames per second: http://t.co/B173sB98 #ted #takethatcanon

Zynga management dumps stock a…

Zynga management dumps stock at 4x current stock price just before crash… booo: http://t.co/B5ELXlFO

Google Residential Fiber (holy…

Google Residential Fiber (holy crap this looks amazing / dammit it’s not offered in Blacksburg, VA): http://t.co/taX5ktVE

RT @cs_conferences: Congrats t…

RT @cs_conferences: Congrats to AKSW’s Ali Khalili, who won Best Paper at @compsac 2012 for “The RFDa Content Editor”! http://t.co/PO2CKCTH

The bear ladder technique (vid…

The bear ladder technique (video): http://t.co/IiQ3Kavs #rescue

A Visual Mind Map of SCRUM: ht…

A Visual Mind Map of SCRUM: http://t.co/yP2jQdbC #scrum #mindmap

Vint Cerf (father of the Inter…

Vint Cerf (father of the Internet) calls bullshit on revisionist Internet history: http://t.co/ECYUaVwm #arpanet #crovitz

Web Payments group on aligning…

Web Payments group on aligning JSON Web Keys & Security vocab, new payswarm.js release, Web Keys http://t.co/EYP3yUCF #payswarm #w3c

JSON-LD group discusses single…

JSON-LD group discusses single term to multiple IRIs, a formal grammar, @context within @context, more: http://t.co/flxP4wB9 #jsonld

Want to find out more about to…

Want to find out more about today’s PaySwarm release? Listen in 15 minutes: http://t.co/dtMsDBtd #futureofmoney #payswarm

Just pushed an update for http…

Just pushed an update for http://t.co/S685NAb1 REST APIs that allows one to use payswarm.js: http://t.co/f439h1tD #payswarm #w3c

@yoichiro @andraz @mterenzio @…

@yoichiro @andraz @mterenzio @orangeaurochs Also, check out the live RDFa editor/visualizer/viewer: http://t.co/yqJY4mM3 #rdfa

@yoichiro @andraz @mterenzio T…

@yoichiro @andraz @mterenzio The RDFa Lite specification is under 5 pages, simple: http://t.co/WmSVpDAI #rdfa #html5

@bsletten Best way to eat Marm…

@bsletten Best way to eat Marmite: toast white bread, spread butter, put 1 tsp of marmite on top – delicious. #yesreally

Ever seen a master mason lay 1…

Ever seen a master mason lay 12-inch block? It’s very zen-like: http://t.co/Pfgvdrmm /via @sivers #mastery #masonry

The onion gives the most bitin…

The onion gives the most biting coverage of the Colorado shootings: http://t.co/I6r575RG

Amazing dot-display blends the…

Amazing dot-display blends the physical with the virtual – encourages opportunistic play: http://t.co/jAHkRdsC

@venessamiemis re: http://t.co…

@venessamiemis re: http://t.co/If10LimE a few suggestions from south west Virginia: http://t.co/xVR1orJ4 #bushmeat #joking

So, two Wildebeasts try to cro…

So, two Wildebeasts try to cross a river: http://t.co/LcGAeSdY /via +Pemo Theodore #joke

@elisabethstaab hey, I spend m…

@elisabethstaab hey, I spend most of my day working on stuff that is only /figuratively/ in flames – nice to see it self actualize for once.

… as in, we were all watchin…

… as in, we were all watching it go, then “POPPFFSSSHH”, blank screens, then smoke coming out of the power supply. #load #testing

So, we were just load testing …

So, we were just load testing the PaySwarm reference implementation, doing tens of thousands of txns – the box /literally/ caught on fire.

Lighter-Than-Air Material Coul…

Lighter-Than-Air Material Could Drastically Change Tech http://t.co/MCoc734t /via @sardire #nanotech