W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > August 2007

Re: Issues to record

From: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2007 19:11:26 -0700
Message-ID: <46BD1ACE.8040607@adida.net>
To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org


Ivan wrote:
> ISSUE: what is the action if the value of @rel, @rev, @instanceof,
> @property are empty (ie, "")?
> 
> My proposal: do not generate any triple

To be clear, you're proposing no new triple, but chaining should still
occur, right? This is an interesting proposal for those advanced cases,
and I see the appeal. I certainly like this a lot more than [_:] :) (can
you tell which one is the smiley?)

> ISSUE: what is the action if the value of @rel, @rev, etc, are not
> namespace backed, ie, no ':' is included?
> 
> Alt 1: do not generate any triple
> Alt 2: generate the triple in the xhtml namespace
> Alt 3: generate the triple in the xhtml namespace for the <link> and
> <meta> elements (for backward compatibility with HTML metadata notation)
> 
> My Proposal: a preference for #3
> 
> Mark claims that this has already been resolved in the past; if so,
> forget about this, and put it on the account of me being careless:-)

Indeed, we already decided that special values would be handled
specifically by the RDFa profile for the host language. In fact, we had
talked about a namespace-level hGRDDL profile for this, something that
would rewrite rel="next" to rel="xhtml:next" automatically for just this
kind of inclusion of default XHTML meaning.

So I support Alt 3. TimBL will shoot us if we do Alt 2. ;)

> ISSUE: should we accept @name as an alternative to @property for the
> <meta> element?
> 
> Alt 1: yes, but a possible @property has a higher priority
> Alt 2: no
> 
> Proposal: #1 (to ensure backward compatibility, so to say)

I think we don't need to do this in every case, in fact it doesn't make
sense in every case. It only makes sense if they're using a reserved
word in the @name, in which case we can already trigger a rule that maps
@name to @property.

So, in the *general* case, I say NO. But as part of the "default rules
for the host language" of course I would see:

<meta name="reserved_word">foo</meta>

changes to

<meta property="xhtml:reserved_word">foo</meta>

given default host language rules.

-Ben
Received on Saturday, 11 August 2007 02:11:41 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:15:09 GMT