- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Wed, 15 Sep 2010 14:40:18 -0500
- 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 UTC