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

head/@profile, profile link relation, was: Request to publish HTML+RDFa (draft 3) as FPWD

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 09:34:52 +0200
Message-ID: <4AB0951C.9000702@gmx.de>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
CC: HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, RDFa mailing list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Manu Sporny wrote:
> The 3rd draft of the HTML+RDFa specification has been released and is
> available here:
> 
> http://html5.digitalbazaar.com/specs/rdfa.html
> 
> The diff-marked version can be found here:
> 
> http://html5.digitalbazaar.com/specs/rdfa-diff-20090906-20090915.html
> 
> Changes in this version of the spec include:
> ...

Very interesting; I'd like to see this published as FPWD.

Here are a few comment with respect to head/@profile and the "profile" 
link relation:

- in the description of head/@profile, the format of a 
whitespace-separated list of URIs should be allowed; thus, an RDFa 
processor should not rely on the defined URI to be the single value.

- the current definition of the "profile" link relation makes it sound 
as if it can be used exclusively with RDFa; I thought it's supposed to 
be a generic replacement for head/@profile?

Looking at these two comments it appears that head/@profile and 
link/@rel=profile really should be specified separately from RDFa... 
(this is in fact an open HTML5 issue)

BR, Julian
Received on Wednesday, 16 September 2009 07:35:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 29 September 2014 09:39:08 UTC