- From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 18:58:31 +0000
- To: Paul Houle <ontology2@gmail.com>
- Cc: Linked Data community <public-lod@w3.org>
On Fri, 2010-03-12 at 10:21 -0500, Paul Houle wrote:
> I think the differential use of href and resource here maximizes
> backwards and forwards compatibility. It is non-conformant to use
> legacy link/@rel elements if @about is not set in the <html> element.
> Also,
>
> <link about=”{any_subject}” rel=”{reserved_value}” href=”{object}”>
> <link about=”{any_subject}” rel=”{reserved_value}” href=”{object}”>
>
> Is disallowed because legacy clients could misinterpret it. If we
> want to assert predicates such as “alternate”, “cite” about documents
> that are not the present document, we need to add a namespace
> declaration like
>
> xmlns:xhv=”http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#”
>
> and then write the predicate as a CURIE:
>
> <link about=”{any_subject}” rel=”xhv:{reserved_value}”
> resource=”{object}”>
In understand this concern, but there's no need to use xhtml:xhv. Legacy
clients can be worked around using:
<link about="{subject}" rel=":license" resource="{object}" />
Note the leading colon for the rel token. RDFa processors automatically
interpret any CURIE with a leading colon as being prefixed
<http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#>. It's a trick I often use if I
think legacy clients will misunderstand something.
--
Toby A Inkster
<mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk>
<http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Sunday, 14 March 2010 18:59:11 UTC