W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-data-tf@w3.org > October 2011

Re: Draft response to ISSUE-105: @itemref support

From: Lin Clark <lin.w.clark@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2011 10:33:47 +0100
Message-ID: <CACho_AuJ1eFQPNPOnbUio8DyOmcp2GTXmFrcWw9UZ7tUXAH72g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
Cc: public-html-data-tf@w3.org
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 10:14 AM, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>wrote:
>
>
> itemref is not only for shared properties, arguably the more important use
> case is for when the data is not all in a single subtree, e.g. as in
> http://www.2gc.co.uk/a2gc-**people <http://www.2gc.co.uk/a2gc-people>
>
> Given that it's useful and implemented in both content (previous link) and
> implementations (Opera), why would we consider dropping it?
>
>
If I'm not mistaken, they aren't talking about dropping it in microdata but
instead are talking about not implementing it in RDFa... and in the case of
properties not being in the same subtree in RDFa, the same 'about' value can
be used to associate properties from two subtrees with the same subject.



-- 
Lin Clark
DERI, NUI Galway <http://www.deri.ie/>

lin-clark.com
twitter.com/linclark
Received on Monday, 17 October 2011 09:34:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 17 October 2011 09:34:21 GMT