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: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 17:11:29 -0600
Message-ID: <47967821.30502@aptest.com>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
CC: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>

Manu Sporny wrote:
> Mark Birbeck wrote:
>> we don't have a problem with unprefixed
>> CURIEs in @about, @property, @datatype, or @resource.
> If we have a problem with unprefixed CURIEs in @rel and @rev, why are we
> not being consistent and stating that they don't belong in
> @about/@property/@datatype and @resource in XHTML+RDFa?
Yeah... I think I agree with this.  Just drop them altogether from 
XHTML+RDFa.  We don't need them for anything.  CURIEs are prefixed.  
Period.  They expand to IRIs lexically and URIs in the value space.  End 
of story.

 From a syntax perspective it is a little weird.  I think that the 
syntax becomes curie :  prefix ':' reference

and the datatype for @rel and @rev becomes curie | one of an enumerated 
list of values.

Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Tuesday, 22 January 2008 23:11:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:26 UTC