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

Re: Exact wording for non-prefixed CURIEs in @rel/@rev

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 17:18:14 -0500
Message-ID: <47966BA6.9010704@digitalbazaar.com>
To: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>

Mark Birbeck wrote:
>> [...]
>>
>> Thoughts?
> 
> I think it could work. But I'm feeling that a more compact solution
> would be possible, by simply removing unprefixed CURIEs altogether,
> and then ensuring that valid unprefixed values get prefixed.
> 
> How about that? 

Yes - that sounds great.

> We simply modify the introductory part of the CURIE
> section to say that unprefixed CURIEs are ignored (which we have
> already, but it's not published) and then in some other suitable spot
> we just say that "license" => "xh:license", "next" => "xh:next", and
> so on.

If you mean all "unprefixed CURIEs are ignored in all RDFa attributes",
then agreed. I want to make sure that we are ignoring all unprefixed
CURIEs in @property. This is to ensure consistency in the "unprefixed
CURIEs are ignored" statement.

> And we might as well change the empty prefix from XHTML-vocab (since
> no-one needs to write ":next" anymore) to the current default mapping.

Could you clarify? This sounds like the empty prefix could be set to
whatever is defined by "xmlns"... at which point, I second Shane's
"eeeewww".

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Intro to the Semantic Web in 6 minutes (video)
http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2007/12/26/semantic-web-intro
Received on Tuesday, 22 January 2008 22:18:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 22 January 2008 22:18:30 GMT