- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 06:55:52 -0600
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- CC: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
XHTML-RDFa is based upon XHTML 1.1, not 1.0. And the group resolved to permit @href everywhere because it enabled many use cases and didn't break anything. Ben or Ralph can no doubt cite the resolution. Ivan Herman wrote: > > > Shane McCarron wrote: >> I have stayed silent through this whole debate 'cause I am basically >> not qualified to debate how many angels can dance on the head of this >> particular pin. However, one thing you said here, Ivan, I felt I >> needed to correct / expand upon: >> >> Ivan Herman wrote: >>> (Note that this may be considered as a mild edge case, too: after >>> all, @href can appear on <a> only in XHTML1) >> Well - regardless of what is permitted in XHTML1, by which I assume >> you mean XHTML 1.0, in XHTML + RDFa @href is allowed everywhere, more >> or less. So as we think about triple generation, we need to keep >> that in mind. >> > > Really? I thought we decided that would not be the case some point in > the past (I remember long debates about this) when we introduced > @resource. The logic being to minimize the differences between > XHTML1.0 and XHTML+RDFa to what is strictly necessary. But I may be > wrong. > >> I now return you to your regularly scheduled technical debate. >> > > :-) > > Ivan > > -- Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Wednesday, 9 January 2008 12:56:10 UTC