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

Re: [RDFa] non-binding resolutions

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 28 Jul 2007 09:56:34 +0200
Message-ID: <46AAF6B2.6000204@w3.org>
To: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
CC: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>


Ben Adida wrote:
>> 
>> - one small thing that you seem to forget: the @data attribute on the
>> <object>. Do we remain silent on that, or do we include them on the same
>> level and functionality as @src? I would propose to equate it with @src
> 
> In a telecon, we leaned towards not specifying anything for @data at
> this point, simply because there may be many ways to resolve this, and
> it's not clear it's really necessary. Is this really important to you?
> Is there a use case?
> 

Not a strong one. My almost only usage of object is when I want to
include and svg file with a proper fallback. Ie:

<object data="file.svg" type="....>
<img src="fallback.png" ..../>
</object>

I may want to 'annotate' the included svg file exactly the same way as I
do for images and may also want to add some things like

<file.svg> role:fallback <fallback.png>.

which would become a bit convoluted without that rule. I agree this is
not a very compelling use case, so I will not have sleepness nights if
this does not get included....

Ivan


-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf


Received on Saturday, 28 July 2007 07:56:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:15:08 GMT