Re: XHTML vocab updated

Mark Birbeck wrote:
> Hi Dan,
>
> My recollection of this was that it was done in the early days of the
> joint work on RDFa, although I don't recall the intention being to
> have a separate document. You'll see that Shane has added some RDFa
> already to the vocab document, and I think it would be great to agree
> upon the statements you've defined, and then to put those into the
> vocab document, too.
>   
It was indeed from that era. Consequently it was based on whatever the 
XHTML 2.0 drafts had for link types. The /1999/xhtml/vocab doc currently 
says "This is a vocabulary collection utilized by XHTML Family modules 
and document types" - does that mean its membership-criteria could be 
broader? eg. if any link types were in XHTML1 but dropped, should we 
still document them in RDF? Can we reflect in stuff from the HTML5 
eventually too?

http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/#linkTypes

for example, http://www.w3.org/html/wg/html5/#contact seems a useful 
relationship to have a name for.

cheers,

Dan
 
> Regards,
>
> Mark
>
> 2008/4/4 Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>:
>   
>>  Shane McCarron wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> Thanks to Roland, the reserved value vocabulary document at
>>>       
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab has been updated to be valid against the
>> new DTD (typeof instead of instanceof).
>>     
>>>       
>>  Hi folks
>>
>>  Any thoughts on where http://www.w3.org/2005/05/hrel/ might fit in?
>>
>>  I began this during the old SWBPD WG in 2005, just prior to leaving W3C.
>> It's something of an orphaned pre-draft since then.
>>
>>  It is also from the XHTML2 days. Takes no account of HTML5 or the changes
>> around HTML in last 3 years... Basically it gives a simple RDF vocabulary
>> for the HTML link types. At the time we were unsure what namespace URI to
>> associate them with...
>>
>>     
>
>
>
>

Received on Saturday, 5 April 2008 17:16:57 UTC