W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-comments@w3.org > September 2010

Re: HTML WG: ISSUE-120 Use of prefixes is too complicated for a Web technology

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 14:40:18 -0500
Message-ID: <4C912122.3070604@aptest.com>
To: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
CC: nathan@webr3.org, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>, public-html-comments@w3.org, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
  Don't get me wrong.  I still PERSONALLY think that HTML5 should 
support the general case of xmlns, at least in its XHTML5 personality.  
But we don't need it.  If it is there, an RDFa Core processor will use 
it.  If it went away, we wouldn't notice ;-)

On 9/15/2010 2:38 PM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
> Shane McCarron, Wed, 15 Sep 2010 14:31:53 -0500:
>>   I actually think ISSUE-41 is completely orthogonal to the direction
>> RDFa is going.  RDFa Core defines @prefix and effectively deprecates
>> xmlns.  We don't care about namespaces.  We never did.  We just
>> needed a way to map one string to another for shorthand vocabulary
>> terms that are easily dereferenced on the web.
> OK, thank you for that update. Well, I was a aware ofre @prefix. But I
> thought that you still were interested in xmlns support in HTML5. So it
> seems that the change proposals w.r.t. to ISSUE-41 do not need to
> consider RDFa, then. Sorry, tried to pay the bill without the host -
> never a good idea ...

-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Wednesday, 15 September 2010 19:41:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 June 2011 00:14:05 GMT