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

Small comments on new primer

From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2008 12:32:27 +0200
To: "Ben Adida" <ben@adida.net>
Cc: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <op.t9sx8dgrsmjzpq@acer3010>

1. I think Mark's email address is changing. He's probably already  
remarked on that.

2. I think we need to disambiguate the use of "HTML WG". I think we should  
say "XHTML2 WG" or, "HTML WG as was, now the XHTML2 WG".

3. We should either expand "@rel" etc., to "the rel attribute", or explain  
the @ notation.

4. I like the comparison of not using namespaces to storing all files in  
one folder!

5. "Field names". Is this a technical term I hadn't heard or something you  
use just for this document? I personally would prefer 'property'.

6. You call @instanceof a "new RDFa attribute". I would remove the 'new'  
here.

7. You say that the TYPE arrow is special. I would remove that, and just  
say that it indicates the type of the node, and leave it at that. It's not  
really *that* special.

8. Shortly after the phrase "Alice is ecstatic" you have an example using  
foaf:knows, with a couple of mistakes:

	http://example.com/bob/">Bob</a>
should read
	http://example.com/elias/">Elias</a>
and
	http://example.com/eve/">Eve</a>
should read
	http://example.com/michael/">Michael</a>

9. It should be made clear that the graph that results has nothing to do  
with the <ul> in the code, and that the same would have been produced if  
the <ul> has been another <div> and the <li>s <p>s.

10. The acknowledgments refer to the XHTML2 WG and the references to the  
HTML WG (though with the XHTML2 WG URI). These need to be consistencised.

11. I don't think that the primer needs to reference itself in the  
references. :-)

That was it.

Steven
Received on Friday, 18 April 2008 10:33:05 UTC

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