New note: RDF versus semantic HTML

content/notes/rdf-versus-semantic-html.md

@@ -0,0 +1,25 @@
+---
+title: "RDF versus semantic HTML"
+date: 2022-09-13T21:30:02-07:00
+replyURI: "https://cybre.space/@jauntywunderkind420/108993489770129012"
+replyTitle: "Microdata and rdfa are excellent and wonderful ways to describe individual html elements"
+replyType: "SocialMediaPosting"
+replyAuthor: "@jauntywunderkind420@cybre.space"
+replyAuthorURI: "https://cybre.space/@jauntywunderkind420/"
+---
+
+> microdata and rdfa both directly mark up existing html content.
+
+Only on a syntactical level. Beyond that, it's the other way around: Microdata and <abbr>RDFa</abbr> let you build <abbr>RDF</abbr> triples by taking content *from* HTML elements. They don't exist to add information *to* HTML elements.
+
+HTML and Microdata/<abbr>RDFa</abbr> syntaxes being mixed into the same document doesn't change this. They're only combined so human- and machine-readable data can remain identical without repetition, not to create more linked-data than the sum of its parts. You could re-write the very same <abbr>RDFa</abbr> data in e.g. Turtle syntax, with the HTML discarded. That's why I wasn't particularly fond of the (rejected) Microdata/RDFa approach to WAI-Adapt. (I think this was one of the major criticism raised, but I can't seem to find it)
+
+An `@id` in JSON-LD takes information _from_, rather than adding information _to_, the HTML document; HTML-parsing user-agents should ignore it unless they're extracting <abbr>RDF</abbr> data from Microdata/<abbr>RDFa</abbr>.
+
+> there's also `itemid`...the page can define multiple different resources on it, give a <abbr>uri</abbr> to the different bits of content on it.
+
+`itemid` is just a way to refer to add to another object instead of creating a new one. Again, it's a way to extract information from different parts of an HTML document (or different HTML documents altogether) rather than a way to add to HTML elements.
+
+Microformats sometimes use HTML itself rather than extracting data from it (see the `e-` prefix). This puts microformats in a sort of gray area, extracting data from HTML but also integrating with it.
+
+I make extensive use of Microdata and microformats on seirdy.one. Strictly speaking, both syntaxes are made of HTML; however, I've certainly found the microformats approach to feel more "HTML-native" than Microdata.

content/notes/wai-adapt-fallbacks-to-equivalent-microformats.md

@@ -1,6 +1,6 @@
 ---
 title: "WAI-Adapt fallbacks to equivalent microformats"
-date: 2022-09-13T11:30:15-07:00
+date: 2022-09-13T11:28:15-07:00
 replyURI: "https://github.com/w3c/adapt/wiki/Comparison-of-ways-to-use-vocabulary-in-content"
 replyTitle: "Comparison of ways to use vocabulary in content"
 replyAuthor: "WAI-Adapt Task Force"
@@ -16,4 +16,4 @@ There's a 1-1 mapping between many microformats and values in [the WAI-Adapt Con
 
 I propose the addition of microformats2 to the comparison wiki page, and would support either merging the content module with microformats or specifying a mapping for fallback.
 
-Syndicated to <a href="https://github.com/w3c/adapt/issues/221" class="u-syndication" rel="syndication">the GitHub w3c/adapt bug tracker</a>.
+Syndicated to <a href="https://github.com/w3c/adapt/issues/221" class="u-syndication" rel="syndication">the GitHub w3c/adapt bug tracker</a> and <a href="https://indieweb.xyz/en/accessibility" class="u-syndication" rel="syndication">indieweb.xyz/en/accessibility</a>.