It is in scope because we define a proscriptive list of values for @rel/@rev and other (unscoped) values are not valid / do not produce triples. However, if people feel that it is inappropriate to make that a legal value in conforming XHTML+RDFa documents, I will let it drop. Ben Adida wrote: > Shane McCarron wrote: > >> I guess I was proposing "transformation" in the XHTML vocab# space is >> because the already use it and they are a REC. I don't think we should >> second guess their choice, but with our current language for XHTML 2 and >> XHTML+RDFa their value would be invalid. And that seems >> counter-productive. >> > > Except they use it *only* when there's a GRDDL @profile, and I'm pretty > sure DanC would say that it shouldn't mean anything without a @profile > (follow-your-nose.) > > Also, why is this in scope? > > -Ben > -- Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.comReceived on Tuesday, 11 December 2007 22:39:42 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:15:19 GMT