W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > April 2008

Re: ISSUE-116: Last Call Comment: use CURIE prefix other than xmlns for future HTML compatibility

From: Ralph R. Swick <swick@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 10:20:47 -0400
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20080417101404.0321eed8@127.0.0.1>
To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org

At 05:15 PM 4/3/2008 +0000, SWD Issue Tracker wrote:
>http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/116

I propose something like:

  "This specification does not address using RDFa in HTML
  documents."

True

  "... the mapping of CURIE prefixes will have to be rewritten
  for HTML documents ..."

very likely True.  The separate CURIE spec [1] anticipates this;

  [[
  When CURIES are used in an XML-based host language, prefix
  values MUST be able to be defined using the 'xmlns:' syntax
  specified in [XMLNAMES]. Such host languages MAY also provide
  additional prefix mapping definition mechanisms.

  When CURIES are used in a non-XML host language, the host
  language MUST provide a mechanism for defining the mapping
  from the prefix to an IRI.
  ]]
  -- [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-curie-20080402/#s_syntax

We design for our Host Language.  At present, our (only)
Host Language is XHTML.  XHTML has a mechanism that
does exactly what we need for creating (prefix, URI) pairs
and that mechanism is supported by existing DOM
implementations.

We believe that RDFa deployment will be better supported
by leveraging the existing DOM implementations than by
inventing a parallel mechanism for XHTML that duplicates
@xmlns for RDFa version 1.

We note that  any proposal for a parallel mechanism to
@xmlns would have to consider proposals for changing
behaviours such as the inheritance rules that @xmlns
specifies.  The Group does not feel that this would be
a brief discussion.

-Ralph
Received on Thursday, 17 April 2008 14:21:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:27 UTC