W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > February 2006

Options for Issue #12

From: Ben Adida <ben@mit.edu>
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2006 20:27:52 -0500
Message-Id: <42D4C425-590A-4BBA-A7E7-FCBC0EBE200F@mit.edu>
To: public-rdf-in-xhtml task force <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>


Hi all,

Concerning Issue #12:
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/2005-current- 
issues#curies-in-predicates

We discussed whether attributes rel,rev,property should be of type  
CURIE only, instead of CURIE/URI. We already agree that about and  
href need to be CURIE/URI for obvious backwards-compatibility.

A) CURIE only

arguments in favor:
- rel="next" is handled as expected, defaulting to xhtml2 namespace.  
Also, no special-casing for handling these issues.
- HTML authors do think of rel/rev/property as different kinds of  
attributes than subjects or objects.
- CURIE notation with [] is the weakest part of our proposal, in  
terms of others' reactions. Forcing [] everywhere would put this  
issue out in the forefront.

arguments against:
- inconsistency between rel,rev,property and href,about.

B) CURIE/URI

arguments in favor:
- a single RDF triple doesn't need an XMLNS declaration, just a URI
- we can make the URI base different for rel,rev,property.
- consistency across RDF/A attributes

arguments against:
- inconsistency. rel="next" and href="next" don't refer to the same  
RDF entity.

We should continue to debate this issue and resolve it ASAP.

Note that current documents assume Option A.

-Ben
Received on Sunday, 19 February 2006 01:27:55 GMT

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