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: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2010 11:47:25 +0100
Message-ID: <4C91F5BD.4010309@webr3.org>
To: nathan@webr3.org
CC: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>, public-html-comments@w3.org, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Nathan wrote:
> Manu Sporny wrote:
>> Just a heads-up. The editor of the HTML5 specification has escalated an
>> issue in the HTML WG that started out as a bug against RDFa in HTML.
>> This concerns the design decision to use prefixes in RDFa as well as the
>> concept of CURIEs:
>> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/120
>> The entire bug history can be found here:
>> http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7670
> can somebody point me to a proposed and viable alternative?

Is the HTML editor open to having first class support for 
prefixes/CURIEs in HTML, such as the introduction of a new metadata 
element "prefix" with the attributes @name and @href (or "curie" with 
the attributes @prefix and @href)?

i.e. is the HTML editor looking to introduce well defined and easily 
maintainable prefix/curie support in to HTML? or conversely, is the HTML 
editor looking to relegate @prefix on the grounds that it's too 
complicated and difficult to maintain moving forwards, without proposing 
or seconding an alternative solution?

as an aside, if @prefix is defined by a specification which extends 
HTML, then does it fall under the HTML editors remit to maintain @prefix?


Received on Thursday, 16 September 2010 10:48:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:26:26 UTC