W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > November 2005

Re: Comments on RDF/A Syntax (Editor's Draft 27 October 2005)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2005 09:07:50 -0500
Message-Id: <fbbb92b6abf0731de20291997415d57c@w3.org>
Cc: "'Jeremy Wong ???'" <jeremy@miko.hk>, <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
To: "Mark Birbeck" <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>

On Nov 28, 2005, at 7:44 AM, Mark Birbeck wrote:
[...]
> So if you place RDF/XML into another document--say XHTML or SVG--an 
> RDF/XML
> parser should be able to pick it out. For example, in SVG you can embed
> RDF/XML in the metadata element, and an RDF/XML parser should be able 
> to
> process that, even though it doesn't 'understand' the SVG that 
> surrounds
> this data.

Not in all cases. The surrounding XML could quote or negate the 
included RDF/XML.

Parsers can only do this "peeking" when they've got some particular 
reason
(e.g. a command-line flag) to know that embedded RDF/XML is to be taken
literally.

[[
The W3C TAG issue RDFinXHTML-35: Syntax and semantics for embedding RDF 
in XHTML concerns this freedom in many other cases, as well. A naive 
approach is to say that RDF/XML has its usual meaning wherever it 
appears in any XML document. But that would conflict with the existing 
practice using RDF/XML in XSLT templates, not to mention any future 
practice of quoting, quantifying, refuting, or commenting on embedded 
RDF expressions.
]]
  -- http://www.w3.org/2004/01/rdxh/specbg.html
-> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?type=1#RDFinXHTML-35


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Monday, 28 November 2005 14:08:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:15:00 GMT