Re: comment on using RDFa

Mark Birbeck wrote:
> 
> Hi Peter,
> 
> 
> RDFa is still going to change a little more before it is finalised, so
> comments like this are especially useful. In this case though, the
> problem could be with the bookmarklet, since as things stand
> non-prefixed class names should be ignored. The motivation is to try
> as much as possible to ensure that the author 'really, really'
> intended to create these triples.
> 
> 

Mark,

Just a clarification, when we say prefixed, do we mean the mere fact
they contain a ':' or must there be an xmlns declaration matching that
prefix? What about the case for 'http://example.org/my/property'?

Just want to make sure we track this and add it to the primer, that is,
whatever the correct answer is.

-Elias