- From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
- Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 11:43:44 +0300
- To: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
On May 14, 2009, at 17:21, Ben Adida wrote: > Except, as I already responded, this was a bug in one of Yahoo's > user-facing pages they had, not in the actual RDFa parser they use > for their actual SearchMonkey pages (which is, in fact, based on one > of the RDFa task force's parsers.) My point is that there's a problem that CURIEs enable that class of bugs. > My point remains: there have been long, verbose claims of namespace > aware vs. non-namespace aware API calls, how it will require browser > changes, etc... and in practice, *it doesn't matter*. If browsers > choose not to fix this, RDFa parsers can address this with *one* > "if" statement. I think the connotations of the word "fix" are inappropriate here, since DOM Level 2 predates RDFa. As for one 'if' statement, experience with the lang vs. xml:lang issue suggests that violation of DOM Consistency cause more code than one 'if' statement in practice. > I have trouble seeing these so-called problems you raise as anything > more than theoretical. In all of the actual RDFa implementations to > date, no one's complained. When I last checked RDFa implementations, they either used a namespace- unaware API or supported only XML. I don't know if this is a coincidence or the effect of the RDFa syntax poking a syntactic area whose infoset mapping differs for XML and HTML. http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2009Feb/0106.html -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@iki.fi http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Monday, 18 May 2009 08:44:25 UTC