W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > March 2009

Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 09:34:56 +0200
Cc: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, RDFa mailing list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, public-xhtml2@w3.org, "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-Id: <3F159B74-7B73-485C-89FA-13232D80C4CF@iki.fi>
To: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
On Mar 5, 2009, at 03:03, Ben Adida wrote:

> I've delved into multiple specs, given technical
> examples, and even written code to prove that Henri's assumptions were
> incorrect.

The code you have shown[1] uses a namespace-unaware API (DOM Level 1).  
Using a namespace-unaware API isn't a suitable way to show the absence  
of issues with namespace-aware APIs.

> I've spent an untold number of hours debating this issue when Henri  
> isn't even interested in *using* RDFa.

I am, however, interested in the requirements posed on text/html  
parsers and I'm interested in the impact RDFa support would have on  
validators.

> Personal taste is, in particular, *not* a good reason to change  
> anything.

I continue to disapprove of downplaying technical issues by portraying  
them as personal taste.

[1] http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/impl/js/
-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Thursday, 5 March 2009 07:35:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:02 UTC