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

Re: Fine-tuning CURIEs (reply #2 :-)

From: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2007 16:54:05 -0700
Message-ID: <46E9CD9D.7070209@adida.net>
To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org

Mark wrote:
> I haven't yet seen anything that convincingly says why we should
> change the parsing rules for CURIEs such that they are no longer a
> super-set of QNames, given that their whole purpose is to do what
> QNames has been co-opted to do, but do it 'properly'.

I think Ivan is right on this one: our thinking cannot depend on a
future CURIE spec. We need to make things work with existing XHTML 1.1.

So, with a CURIE-independent mindset, we can't have rel="openid.server"
or rel="DC.creator" generate spurious triples. If we attempt this, we'll
get killed at Last Call, just like we got killed for the spurious @class

I don't see any other solution than to say that "next" and "prev" are
special-cased, using e.g. a pre-processing step, and any other
non-namespaced values are ignored.

If that changes in XHTML2, that's fine, of course. Consistency is not
always possible when we have to be mostly backwards compatible with the
existing web. But XHTML1.1+RDFa can't force authors to change their
XHTML 1.1 too much.

Received on Thursday, 13 September 2007 23:54:12 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:24 UTC