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

Re: Request to publish HTML+RDFa (draft 3) as FPWD

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 2009 00:52:12 -0500
Message-ID: <4AB4718C.3040705@aptest.com>
To: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
CC: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, RDFa mailing list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>

Jonas Sicking wrote:
> The problem is that the way HTML parsing works, markup like:
> <div xmlns:foo="http://namespace.example.org">
> Does not parse the xmlns:foo attribute into something that "declare
> [an] XML Namespace mapping". Specifically, it does not create an
> attribute in the "http://www.w3.org/2000/xmlns/" namespace. Or an
> attribute with a "xmlns" prefix and "foo" localName. It creates an
> attribute in the null namespace, with a localName that is "xmlns:foo".
> So *an* attribute shows up in the DOM. Just not an attribute that
> declares a XML Namespace.
> Now, we can argue if that is how HTML5 should define parsing. But that
> is how it currently defines it. And as far as I can see the HTML+RDFa
> spec does not seem to change that.

Andy that's fine.  We don't care.  RDFa doesn't use namespaces.  RDFa 
uses vocabularies and prefix mappings.  As long as an implementation can 
discover the prefix mappings and transl;ate vocabulary item references 
into those mappings, we are good.  As far as I can tell, that means we 
are good everywhere.

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, 19 September 2009 05:53:06 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 29 October 2015 10:15:51 UTC