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 18:31:28 -0500
Message-ID: <4A188750.4040801@aptest.com>
To: Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>
CC: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, 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>


Philip Taylor wrote:
> Shane McCarron wrote:
>
> If portability isn't guaranteed in a very simple case like this, then 
> it sounds like the specification would have failed at the fundamental 
> task of specifying behaviour that will be interoperably implemented.

That's really not the same issue at all.... but let's go there.  
Portability and interoperability in this context are specifically 
related to the triples that are extracted from identical input by 
different conforming processors.  The specification REQUIRES case 
sensitive processing of prefix names.  Right now.  There is no question 
about that.  And a conforming processor will adhere to this 
requirement.  I would not be open to loosening that requirement, since 
it seems silly to do so.

However, I could envision a client-side processor running on a legacy 
user agent that would have trouble adhering to this requirement.  Such a 
processor would NOT be a conforming processor and portability and 
interoperability would NOT be guaranteed.  However, with some simple 
guidance to authors we can help to increase the portability among even 
these non-conforming processors.  That's goodness, and costs us nothing.

-- 
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 23:32:22 GMT

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