W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-commits@w3.org > February 2010

html5/rdfa Overview.html,1.18,1.19

From: Manu Sporny via cvs-syncmail <cvsmail@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 18 Feb 2010 05:28:21 +0000
To: public-html-commits@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1Nhyw1-0005rw-DN@lionel-hutz.w3.org>
Update of /sources/public/html5/rdfa
In directory hutz:/tmp/cvs-serv22339

Modified Files:
	Overview.html 
Log Message:
Updated the spec to reflect the HTML WG Chairs decision:

1. Reverted the SotD section to what was there over a month ago.
2. Removed all bugs reported in the status sections of the HTML+RDFa spec.
3. Modifed the wording of one of the bugs and insert ISSUE-41 as a 
   blocking item for HTML+RDFa LC.


Index: Overview.html
===================================================================
RCS file: /sources/public/html5/rdfa/Overview.html,v
retrieving revision 1.18
retrieving revision 1.19
diff -u -d -r1.18 -r1.19
--- Overview.html	16 Feb 2010 05:27:27 -0000	1.18
+++ Overview.html	18 Feb 2010 05:28:18 -0000	1.19
@@ -203,7 +203,7 @@
     <h2 class="no-num no-toc" id="a-mechanism-for-embedding-rdf-in-html">A
     mechanism for embedding RDF in HTML</h2>
 
-    <h2 class="no-num no-toc" id="editor-s-draft-date-16-February-2010">W3C
+    <h2 class="no-num no-toc" id="editor-s-draft-date-18-February-2010">W3C
     Working Draft 15 January 2010</h2><!--:ZZZ-->
 
     <dl>
@@ -280,12 +280,6 @@
   <h2 class="no-num no-toc" id="status-of-this-document">Status of this
   document</h2><!-- intro boilerplate (required) -->
 
-  <p class="annotation"><b>Status</b>: There are W3C bug tracker items associated with this  section.<br/><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9012#c0">9012</a>: There is concern that continued development of HTML+RDFa belongs in a different working group.</span><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9011#c0">9011</a>: There are discussions of alternate extensibility mechanisms, covered in [issue-41], which might allow other ways of integrating RDFa.</span><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=9010#c0">9010</a>: There are one or more alternate methods of adding data without using RDFa, such as [microdata].</span><br/>
-  </p>
-
   <p><em>This section describes the status of this document at the time of
   its publication. Other documents may supersede this document. A list of
   current W3C publications and the latest revision of this technical report
@@ -550,11 +544,6 @@
 
   <h2 id="parsing-model"><span class="secno">2</span> Parsing Model</h2>
 
-  <p class="annotation"><b>Status</b>: There are W3C bug tracker items associated with this  section.<br/><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8993#c0">8993</a>: Spec says that mapping from DOM to tree-model is not necessary, but later gives such a mapping</span><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8977#c0">8977</a>: Some conformance keywords are used prior to the Conformance Requirements section</span><br/>
-  </p>
-
   <p><em>This section is normative.</em></p>
 
   <p><a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#sec_5.5.">Section 5.5:
@@ -577,11 +566,6 @@
   <h3 id="modifying-the-input-document"><span class="secno">2.1</span>
   Modifying the Input Document</h3>
 
-  <p class="annotation"><b>Status</b>: There are W3C bug tracker items associated with this  section.<br/><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8976#c0">8976</a>: Modifying the Input Document section is labeled as informative but include normative requirements</span><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8977#c0">8977</a>: Some conformance keywords are used prior to the Conformance Requirements section</span><br/>
-  </p>
-
   <p><em>This section is informative.</em></p>
 
   <p>RDFa's tree-based processing rules, outlined in <a href=
@@ -601,10 +585,6 @@
   <h2 id="conformance-requirements"><span class="secno">3</span> Conformance
   Requirements</h2>
 
-  <p class="annotation"><b>Status</b>: There are W3C bug tracker items associated with this  section.<br/><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8977#c0">8977</a>: Some conformance keywords are used prior to the Conformance Requirements section</span><br/>
-  </p>
-
   <p><em>This section is normative.</em></p>
 
   <p>The keywords "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
@@ -615,13 +595,6 @@
   <h3 id="document-conformance"><span class="secno">3.1</span> Document
   Conformance</h3>
 
-  <p class="annotation"><b>Status</b>: There are W3C bug tracker items associated with this  section.<br/><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8981#c0">8981</a>: Conforming documents are not required to use RDFa constructs in a conforming way</span><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8980#c0">8980</a>: HTML+RDFa has should-/may-level requirements for undefined constructs</span><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8978#c0">8978</a>: Document conformance requirements does not state that extensions to HTML5 syntax are allowed</span><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8979#c0">8979</a>: Please reconsider should-level requirement for version attribute</span><br/>
-  </p>
-
   <p>In order for a document to claim that it is a conforming HTML+RDFa
   document, it must provide the facilities described as mandatory in this
   section. The document conformance criteria are listed below, of which only
@@ -647,10 +620,6 @@
   <h3 id="user-agent-conformance"><span class="secno">3.2</span> User Agent
   Conformance</h3>
 
-  <p class="annotation"><b>Status</b>: There are W3C bug tracker items associated with this  section.<br/><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8982#c0">8982</a>: Unclear what features are required for user agents</span><br/>
-  </p>
-
   <p>A conforming RDFa user agent must:</p>
 
   <ul>
@@ -696,10 +665,6 @@
   <h3 id="specifying-the-language-for-a-literal"><span class=
   "secno">4.1</span> Specifying the language for a literal</h3>
 
-  <p class="annotation"><b>Status</b>: There are W3C bug tracker items associated with this  section.<br/><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8983#c0">8983</a>: Section 4.1 is unclear about language requirements</span><br/>
-  </p>
-
   <p>The <code>lang</code> attribute must be processed in the same manner as
   the <code>xml:lang</code> attribute is in the XHTML+RDFa specification,
   <a href="http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#sec_5.5.">Section 5.5:
@@ -716,11 +681,6 @@
   <h3 id="invalid-xmlliteral-values"><span class="secno">4.2</span> Invalid
   XMLLiteral values</h3>
 
-  <p class="annotation"><b>Status</b>: There are W3C bug tracker items associated with this  section.<br/><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8985#c0">8985</a>: Inclear if requirement to ensure namespace well-formed fragments is separate from other transformation requirements</span><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8984#c0">8984</a>: Invalid XMLLiteral definition of namesspace-well-formed XML fragments is too weak</span><br/>
-  </p>
-
   <p>When generating literals of type XMLLiteral, the processor must ensure
   that the output XMLLiteral is a namespace well-formed XML fragment. A
   namespace well-formed XML fragment has the following properties:</p>
@@ -796,12 +756,6 @@
   <h3 id="xmlns:-prefixed-attributes"><span class="secno">4.3</span>
   <code>xmlns:</code>-Prefixed Attributes</h3>
 
-  <p class="annotation"><b>Status</b>: There are W3C bug tracker items associated with this  section.<br/><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8987#c0">8987</a>: Processing requirements for attributes starting with xmlns: are undefined</span><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8986#c0">8986</a>: Link to "Section 5.4, CURIE and URI Processing" points to the wrong place</span><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8998#c0">8998</a>: There is no requirement that the values of attributes starting with xmlns: conform to Namespaces in XML</span><br/>
-  </p>
-
   <p class="XXX">While this section outlines xmlns: processing in RDFa, the
   support for distributed extensibility in non-XML mode HTML5 (using xmlns
   and xmlns:) is still an open issue. This section may be further modified
@@ -826,10 +780,8 @@
   <h2 id="extensions-to-the-html5-syntax"><span class="secno">5</span>
   Extensions to the HTML5 Syntax</h2>
 
-  <p class="annotation"><b>Status</b>: There are W3C bug tracker items associated with this  section.<br/><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8988#c0">8988</a>: Extensions to HTML5 syntax should be described as extensions, not modifications</span><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8978#c0">8978</a>: Document conformance requirements does not state that extensions to HTML5 syntax are allowed</span><br/>
-  </p>
+  <p class="XXX annotation"><b>Status:</b> <a href="http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/41">ISSUE-41</a> (decentralized extensibility) blocks progress to Last Call</p>
+
 
   <p><em>This section is normative.</em></p>
 
@@ -849,12 +801,6 @@
   "secno">5.2</span> Conformance Criteria for <code>xmlns:</code>-Prefixed
   Attributes</h3>
 
-  <p class="annotation"><b>Status</b>: There are W3C bug tracker items associated with this  section.<br/><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8989#c0">8989</a>: Allowance for attributes starting with xmlns: should be stated as a requirement on documents and conformance checkers, not on the HTML5 spec</span><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8990#c0">8990</a>: Attributes starting with xmlns: are conforming even if illegal per Namespaces in XML</span><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8991#c0">8991</a>: Change to "coercion to infoset" rules is underdefined</span><br/>
-  </p>
-
   <p class="XXX">While this section outlines xmlns: conformance criteria for
   HTML+RDFa, the support for distributed extensibility in non-XML mode HTML5
   (using xmlns and xmlns:) is still an open issue. This section may be
@@ -874,10 +820,6 @@
   <h3 id="preserving-namespaces-via-coercion-to-infoset"><span class=
   "secno">5.3</span> Preserving Namespaces via Coercion to Infoset</h3>
 
-  <p class="annotation"><b>Status</b>: There are W3C bug tracker items associated with this  section.<br/><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8992#c0">8992</a>: Coercion to Infoset extensions mean that HTML document could produce different infosets in an HTML5 UA and an HTML+RDFa UA</span><br/>
-  </p>
-
   <p class="XXX">This section needs feedback from the user agent vendors to
   ensure that this feature does not conflict with user agent architecture and
   has no technical reason that it cannot be implemented.</p>
@@ -912,10 +854,6 @@
   <h2 id="infoset-based-processors"><span class="secno">6</span>
   Infoset-based Processors</h2>
 
-  <p class="annotation"><b>Status</b>: There are W3C bug tracker items associated with this  section.<br/><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8997#c0">8997</a>: Sections 6 and 7 are informative but appear to give normative requirements</span><br/>
-  </p>
-
   <p><em>This section is informative</em></p>
 
   <p>While the intent of the RDFa processing instructions were to provide a
@@ -972,10 +910,6 @@
   <h3 id="processing-rdfa-attributes"><span class="secno">6.2</span>
   Processing RDFa Attributes</h3>
 
-  <p class="annotation"><b>Status</b>: There are W3C bug tracker items associated with this  section.<br/><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8994#c0">8994</a>: HTML+RDFa will process attributes in the XHML namespace as well as the null namespace; XHTML+RDFa does not</span><br/>
-  </p>
-
   <p>There are a number of non-prefixed attributes that are associated with
   RDFa Processing in HTML5. If an XML Information Set based RDFa processor is
   used to process these attributes, the following algorithm should be used to
@@ -1000,11 +934,6 @@
   <h2 id="dom-level-2-based-processors"><span class="secno">7</span> DOM
   Level 2-based Processors</h2>
 
-  <p class="annotation"><b>Status</b>: There are W3C bug tracker items associated with this  section.<br/><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8993#c0">8993</a>: Spec says that mapping from DOM to tree-model is not necessary, but later gives such a mapping</span><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8997#c0">8997</a>: Sections 6 and 7 are informative but appear to give normative requirements</span><br/>
-  </p>
-
   <p><em>This section is informative</em></p>
 
   <p class="XXX">This mechanism should be double-checked against all of the
@@ -1018,11 +947,6 @@
   <h3 id="processing-namespaced-rdfa-attributes-0"><span class=
   "secno">7.1</span> Processing Namespaced RDFa Attributes</h3>
 
-  <p class="annotation"><b>Status</b>: There are W3C bug tracker items associated with this  section.<br/><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8996#c0">8996</a>: Typo in DOM processing rules</span><br/>
-    <span class="annotation">BUG #<a href="http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=8995#c0">8995</a>: DOM processing of xmlns: attributes should look at namespace URI, not namespace prefix</span><br/>
-  </p>
-
   <p>Extracting namespaced RDFa attributes while operating from within a DOM
   Level 2 based RDFa processor can be achieved using the following
   algorithm:</p>
Received on Thursday, 18 February 2010 05:28:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 18 February 2010 05:28:31 GMT