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

Re: @profile is wrong solution for indicating that RDFa is present

From: Simone Onofri <simone.onofri@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2007 16:42:42 +0100
Message-ID: <52bd7c3d0712100742g3dc2ddb8qa0267a25749ed7cf@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Mark Birbeck" <mark.birbeck@formsplayer.com>
Cc: "W3C RDFa task force" <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>

Dear Mark,

Your mail presents a lot of interesting points and inspiration. So
GRDDL choose @profile, and also Danny can explain it - I remember also
the proposal of XHTML WG to use @rel on meta (but in this case also
meta in on the head).

Actually, in this moment I'm writing, I'm according to Ivan to keep
@profile is a fine idea.

But I'm also thinking for another trigger - and maybe fine that can
coexist with @profile. I like @xmlns but I note that cannot be really
compatible with HTML (I'm not happy to do HTML, I love XHTML of course
but we may consider also for it). So another thing is for validation
by HTML and RDF validator both, that cannot be excluded.

Any ideas to get a brainstorm on mailing list?



On Dec 10, 2007 4:17 PM, Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@formsplayer.com> wrote:
> Hello all,
> During the course of writing a blog post [1] in response to one from
> Danny Ayers [2], I realised that the use of @profile to indicate the
> presence of RDFa is not really in keeping with the spirit of the
> attribute in HTML.
> Although not clearly defined, @profile is generally used to provide
> information to a user agent about how it might interpret values in
> <meta> and <link>. This is used to good effect in microformats and
> GRDDL, and both uses of @profile are well within the spirit of how
> @profile is defined in HTML.
> But RDFa already has a way to disambiguate values, based on the use of
> CURIEs and prefix mappings. At the moment we don't use @profile to
> indicate taxonomies, but @xmlns. What we do instead is provide a fixed
> value for @profile that is supposed to indicate the presence of RDFa,
> but that is not providing a 'profile' in the usual sense--a set of
> terms that help with interpretation--but is simply using @profile to
> set a 'boolean' flag to true.
> I feel this overloads @profile in a way that might confuse people
> ("where is the RDFa taxonomy defined by this profile?"), and would
> suggest we look for an alternative means of setting this 'flag'. There
> are many ways we could do this, but for now I wanted to just flag this
> up as an issue.
> Regards,
> Mark
> [1] <http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/2007/12/rdfa-profile-and-following-your-nose.html>
> [2] <http://dannyayers.com/2007/12/08/another-little-abstraction>
> --
>   Mark Birbeck, formsPlayer
>   mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com | +44 (0) 20 7689 9232
>   http://www.formsPlayer.com | http://internet-apps.blogspot.com
>   standards. innovation.

Simone Onofri
Received on Monday, 10 December 2007 15:42:51 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:25 UTC