[uf-new] hAudio/Audio RDF clarification (possible admin moderation request)

Manu Sporny msporny at digitalbazaar.com
Mon Sep 15 16:55:10 PDT 2008

Attached is a personal e-mail that I received today regarding my
intentions towards hAudio and Audio RDF. I will be responding publicly
to what I perceive as an attack on my efforts surrounding hAudio, Audio
RDF, Microformats and RDFa.

I am hesitant to make this a public issue as I don't want to waste
anybody's time, but also do not want any sort of mis-information to be
spread or assumptions made about my intentions with regard to hAudio,
Audio RDF, the Microformats community or RDFa. This is a way of
documenting this issue publicly, so that there is no question with
regard to insinuations of non-transparency. I feel that I must respond
to these allegations, even though I deem them to have no merit, to
prevent people from getting the wrong impression.

This conversation started on the RDFa mailing list:


Attached is a private e-mail I received a little over an three hours ago
from Martin McEvoy. I'm surprised as it is out of character for him to
be this aggressive, but I certainly don't want this to get out of hand.
I'll publicly respond to his comments, as he has asked me to do, in case
anybody else has been under the same mistaken set of impressions.

-- manu


Subject: Re: RDFa and Microformats
From: Martin McEvoy <martin at weborganics.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 22:19:47 +0100
To: Manu Sporny <msporny at digitalbazaar.com>

This is off list Manu

Martin McEvoy wrote:
> Manu Sporny wrote:
>> Martin McEvoy wrote:
>>> Talking of  "hacks" why is this NOT a "hack" :
>>> http://wiki.digitalbazaar.com/en/HAudio_RDFa? it looks like a direct rip
>>> from the Microformats wiki,
>> That's because it started out as a direct rip from the Microformats wiki
> it still is
>> - the fact that it is so close to hAudio was deliberate. The intention
>> was to create a cross-community vocabulary that would work for people
>> jumping between RDFa and Microformats.
> what people?  hAudio is not yet even a draft proposal, and all these
Publisher were Jumping around between vocabularies, that's interesting
show me where?
>> The outcome of that research was
>> this:
> By the W3C, the Microformats Community...?
>> http://purl.org/media/audio
>> The Audio RDF Vocabulary above has a clean/direct mapping to/from
>> Microformats hAudio.

Yo may be wandering about all the retaliation about "audio rdfa" Manu
when you Microformats New mailing list with hAudio RDFa  you received
little support for your endeavour, in fact it was explicitly stated that:

> --- this is one of the things that microformats wants to prevent...

basically because it causes a "drift" in semantics. you received no
feedback from the list because we didn't want you to do it. you read
Brian's email right?  it was an incidental concern.

It goes a little further than that,  basically Manu You ripped the
hAudio Microformat against the wishes of the Microformats Community and
thus seriously damaged the haudio process in fact you almost killed it
dead. if I could have stopped you I would. lets get hAudio out the door
first eh!

I request that you refrain from Editing the hAudio wiki further until I
can be sure you are not serving your own needs.

I cant believe you became an invited expert over your efforts. how did
you deserve that.

I will be adding Myself as Editor on the Version 1.0  format, because I
don't have some other agenda other than completing haudio.

Manu If you Ignore this email like you seem to conveniently do, I will
post this email to the list because I think you will be ignoring me and
I really would like some answers this time publicly or privately .

Best Wishes

Martin McEvoy

More information about the microformats-new mailing list