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

Re: HTML 4 Profile for RDFa

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 13:31:40 -0500
Message-ID: <4A18410C.8060906@aptest.com>
To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
CC: Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, RDFa Community <public-rdfa@w3.org>, "public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf.w3.org" <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>


Julian Reschke wrote:
>
> It's clear that if RDFa is to be used with prefix declarations done 
> with xmlns, then mixing uppercase and lowercase declarations is not 
> going to work.
>
> I think restricting prefixes to be lower-case (insert proper Unicode 
> terminology here) would be acceptable; it's easy to live with, and 
> avoids introducing yet another prefix declaration mechanism.
I would not be opposed to adding text in the RDFa in HTML definition 
like "prefix names SHOULD be defined in lower-case to help ensure 
maximum portability among parsers, since it is common for DOM-based 
parsers to not preserve the case of attribute names."

I don't see there being any need to change the definition of XML-based 
languages like RDFa for XHTML.  After all, in XML case is preserved.  Or 
is ot someone's goal that documents be able to be parsed as EITHER XML 
or HTML?  It's not my goal.  If I define a document using an HTML family 
language, I expect it to be parser using an HTML family parser.  If I 
define it using an XHTML family language then I expect it to be parsed 
using an XML-conforming parser.  Such a parser would preserve the case 
of element and attributes.

Right?

-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Saturday, 23 May 2009 18:32:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:37 GMT