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

Re: RDFa RFE: No Mandated DOCTYPE

From: Benjamin Nowack <bnowack@semsol.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2007 11:50:58 +0100
To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
Message-ID: <PM-GA.20071203115058.3C60B.1.1D@semsol.com>


At the moment, ARC ignores the doctype and simply applies the
RDFa processing rules to the passed document's node tree. I can
make the RDFa doctype mandatory if you think that my current 
approach encourages the creation of non-conforming RDFa.

Benji


On 03.12.2007 10:44:48, Simone Onofri wrote:
>I hope using xmlns and DTD can cover all questions about it.

And so, can be
>fine if Validator also supports validation for xmlns is
the best. But I hope
>to give the question also to who have implemented
RDFa extractors to have also
>the point of view also another point of
view. I've added Fabien, Ivan, Bengee,
>Dave (any others)?

The @profile is the solution we've used for GRDDL and it
>works fine.

Cheers,

Simone

> Le 30 nov. 2007 à 21:54, Sean B. Palmer a
>écrit :
> > On Nov 26, 2007 2:43 AM, Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org> wrote:
> >
> >>
>would the following be a solution for you?
> >>
> >> <html
>xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
> >>
>xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
> >>       version="xhtml11 rdfa
>svg">
> >
> > In what specification would the interpretation of the @version
>values
> > be given? Would they be extensible by users other than the W3C?
>I'm
> > not sure they'd need to be extensible, admittedly.
>
> There are
>troubles with different type of mechanisms.
>
> * known values
>    - Dominant
>players may impose its values
>    - Strong Communities will impose a set of
>values on small communities
>    - Sometimes the known values are not known to
>you, how do you find
> the doc
> * URI system
>    - burdensome for authors
>without an authoring tool
>    - Weakness because of Cache Implementations
>(Single Point of Failure)
>
> > It's been suggested to me that you meant for
>@version to be a hook for
> > namespace GRDDL to dispatch off of; is that
>something that you thought
> > about?
>
> An identifier more than a namespace.
>A flag which says: "Hey watch
> out, here there might be RDFa"
>
> > This
>*would* solve the RDFa discovery problem for me, but I'm not sure
> > how well
>it would work as a discovery mechanism in general, especially
> > given the
>extensibility question and so on. From what Mark and Shane
> > have said, it
>sounds like they're only considering @profile at the
> > moment.
>
> It
>doesn't solve the extensibility question indeed.
>
> > See also
>http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html#standardizedFieldValues-51
>
>
> At a
>personal level, I'm for URIs, though I would prefer a mechanism
> ala CSS,
>where I can declare all my namespaces in *one specific file*
> on my site, and
>be able to link this file from all my documents.
>
> GRDDL suggests the use of
>profile.
> http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl/#grddl-xhtml
>
>    <head
>profile="http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view">
>
> but there are two issues for
>me,
>
> * the file which is delivered at
>
>http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view
>    is a document I have to read, there's
>no predefined format that I
> could automatically grabbed.
> * You have to be
>able to edit head, which is impossible in many
> scenarios. Being able to
>point to another file locally would be cool.
> ala CSS  link rel="stylesheet"
>| style element | style attribute.
> gives a great
>flexibility.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Karl Dubost - W3C
>
>http://www.w3.org/QA/
> Be Strict To Be Cool
>
>
>
>
>
>
>



-- 
Simone
>Onofri
http://www.siatec.net/
Received on Monday, 3 December 2007 10:51:11 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:15:19 GMT