Re: status of non-prefixed values in @rel

XHTML 2 is a spec the XHTML 2 Working Group is currently developing.  It 
has nothing to do with the RDFa task force, except that I assume the 
output of this task force will somehow get folded into that effort.  
Let's (please) ignore XHTML 2 for the purposes of this discussion.

The XHTML 2 Working Group, as part of this task force, has also 
developed an XHTML Modularization 1.0 compatible module (xhtml-rdfa) 
that supports the markup the task force has defined.  That module, when 
used in conjunction with other XHTML M12N modules, has been used by the 
task force to create XHTML+ RDFa, the markup language.  The normative 
definition of that new module is included in the rdfa-syntax 
specification (see chapter 9) because it is a normative part of the 
language we are defining, and because otherwise we would have been 
dependent on an external document (a separate rec-track XHTML-RDFa 
module). 

So yes, I do think there is a little editorial confusion here.  There is 
only one document that defines XHTML+RDFa normatively today.  That 
document is RDFa Syntax.

I suppose the remaining issue is whether this XHTML-compatible module 
needs to define its reserved values for @rel, @rev, and @property.  The 
opinion of the XHTML 2 Working Group has been that those values must be 
normatively defined, but I would be happy to re-raise the issue with 
them if the task force feels there is new information that makes it 
compelling the reserved values not be a normative part of the 
recommendation.

-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com