- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 11 Aug 2006 09:58:16 -0500
- To: Eric van der Vlist <vdv@dyomedea.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
On Fri, 2006-08-11 at 09:59 +0200, Eric van der Vlist wrote: > Hi, > > How should GRDDL be used with XHTML 2.0? > > XHTML 2.0 has no profile attribute. Odd. I wonder why not. > Does that mean that it should be > handed as XML and that the data-view:transformation attribute has to be > used? That should work. > Instead of using a foreign attribute, wouldn't it be better to use a > link element? I don't know; how would that work? And what's wrong with the attribute? > Also, I think that generally speaking, imposing a foreign attribute in > XML is very intrusive: what if you are using a vocabulary that does not > allow foreign namespace attributes? Can you think of any important examples? Somebody found a role attribute in DocBook... similar to the XHTML profile element in some ways. I suggested he could put a namespaceTransformation in the DocBook namespace document to explain to GRDDL consumers how docbook role is like xhtml profile. > Wouldn't it be a good idea to support a PI in addition or instead of the > data-view:transformation attribute? I'd rather not burden GRDDL consumers with character-by-character parsing of PIs, nor grounding PIs in URI space. I haven't found any cases where it seems worthwhile to do so. > Thanks, > > Eric -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Friday, 11 August 2006 14:58:21 UTC