W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > February 2011

Re: HTML5 ISSUE-120 rdfa-prefixes : Proposal to use RDFa according to spec

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Tue, 8 Feb 2011 10:44:46 +0200
Cc: HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, semantic-web@w3.org, RDFa Community <public-rdfa@w3.org>
Message-Id: <D84835BF-B5CB-4DB3-B737-08328075EE22@iki.fi>
To: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
(Removing whatwg from CC, since this is out of scope there.)

On Feb 4, 2011, at 11:35, Danny Ayers wrote:

> ISSUE-120
> Current Status [1,2] :
>>  We a single change proposal to simplify the HTML+RDFa specification
>>  by removing prefixes.
>> - We have another change proposal to clarify how prefixes work and
>>  explain that they are optional.
> 
> I'd like to propose that HTML/HTML5 uses RDFa as found in the RDFa
> specification [3]. This includes the use of namespace prefixes.

> Were this approach taken, I'd suggest it was used alongside including
> RDFa as-is.

The HTML5 effort has, from time to time, been criticized for the perception that the W3C HTML WG doesn't have enough say over matters that are perceived to have originated at the WHATWG.

The notion that the the W3C HTML WG should just accept RDFa as-is is rather interesting in this light. I suggest that *either* RDFa should be subject to whatever second-guessing under the Decision Process of the W3C HTML WG *or* RDFa in HTML shouldn't be published though the W3C HTML WG.

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2011 08:49:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:17:22 GMT