- From: Peter Winnberg <peter.winnberg@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 9 Nov 2011 00:16:00 +0100
- To: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
2011/11/8 Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>: > > The main problem with a global attribute is that it would make it less clear > which attribute takes precedence and whether or not the value is resolved as > a URL, as previously discussed. [1][2] Further, what would the global > attribute be? value="" already exists with different semantics on <button>, > <option>, <input>, <li>, <meter>, <progress> and <param>. content="" is not > an option since RDFa uses it (in the early days microdata had both a > property="" and an about="" attribute and there were objections to this). > > [1] http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=13240#c17 > [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-html/2011Oct/0166.html > First of all, I don’t think that a global attribute that could be used anywhere would be the best solution. For example let’s say that it would be possible to use this attribute on a div that contains contact information. If someone then tries to get the attribute to hold vCard data as a machine-readable version of the div it seems like this could get very messy. I assumed that the attribute only would hold non-URL data (i.e., a literal without type/lang with RDF terms). If it should be able to hold both that and URLs then yes this would get more complicated. If it was specified in a way so that it cannot hold URLs, why cannot the content attribute found in RDFa be used ( see [1] for how it is specified. )? [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-core/#A-content
Received on Tuesday, 8 November 2011 23:16:28 UTC