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

Re: Question about RDF in XHTML 1.0

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 10:16:12 -0600
To: Luca Mascaro <info@lucamascaro.info>, Ian Davis <iand@internetalchemy.org>
Cc: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org, Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Message-Id: <1140538572.26363.488.camel@dirk.w3.org>

On Tue, 2006-02-21 at 16:11 +0100, Steven Pemberton wrote:
> Luca Mascaro wrote:
> > have you considered the possibility to use class
> > attribute for embedding RDF in XHTML 1.0 or 1.1?
> > 
> > For example:
> > 
> > <html xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
> >   <head>
> >     <title>Document</title>
> >   </head>
> >   <body>
> >     <p><cite class="dc:author">Luca Mascaro</cite> is a user interface
> > developer.</p>
> > ..</body>
> > </html>
> > 
> > The CSS 3.0 specification introduce the namespace in CSS
> 
> Unfortunately CSS3 doesn't support namespaces in attribute values, nor 
> does XHTML 1.* allow namespaced values in @class, so my personal view is 
> that we should keep our hands off of the class attribute, and leave it 
> to the uses it has today.

It's reasonably straightforward to use the class attribute with GRDDL
to produce dc:author triples... er... actually, it's dc:creator, no?

Hmm... the Joe Lambda uses invisible <meta> elements to represent
dc:creator info. It should probably use the visible info in
the <address> element.
  http://www.w3.org/2004/lambda/Sites/index.html

I'd like to change that, though I'm not sure when I'll get around to it.
Bonus points to anybody who beats me to it.

Hmm... the embedded RDF examples also seem to use invisible <meta>
elements.
 http://research.talis.com/2005/erdf/wiki/Main/RdfInHtml


Ian, are you interested to provide an example that uses visible data?
Hmm... your homepage (http://iandavis.com/ ) seems to use a combination
of visible and invisible stuff.


> 
> Since the role attribute is now available as a namespaced value, it is 
> my feeling that this exactly addresses the use cases you have in mind, 
> though not in XHTML 1.1 today, which I suppose is your real question.
> 
> So in short: XHTML 1.1 does not allow namespaced values in the class 
> attribute, so you would have to change XHTML 1.1 anyway, so why not 
> change it in a better way?
> 
> Best wishes,
> 
> Steven
-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 21 February 2006 16:16:25 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:20 UTC