Re: RDFa test case #1 missing @profile?

/ Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com> was heard to say:
| I don't mind, but I would love to understand just what GRDDL people
| (Dan?) think will magically happen if there is a profile parameter.
| The profile value we have defined should at this point be meaningless
| to any GRDDL processor, and there is nothing I know of that would
| implement GRDDL for RDFa that the working group has blessed.  What am
| I missing (this time) ?

The point of a @profile isn't just for GRDDL. It's not magic that's
important, it's (1) expression of the author's intent and (2) the
ability to "follow your nose". Consider the following document:

<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
      xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
<head>
<title>My document</title>
</head>
<body>
<p>
<img src="/path/to/my/image.jpg" />
<span about="/user/markb/photo/23456"
      property="dc:title">Sunset in Nice</span>
</p>
</body>
</html>

Given that HTML has historically had an extension policy of "ignore
unknowns", there is nothing about this document that can or should
suggest that any RDF triples follow from it. I, as the author of an
XHTML document with no awareness of RDFa cannot possibly be held
responsible for RDF assertions that RDFa may think follow from this
document.

Adding a profile attribute to this document is what the *author* does
to make it reasonable and correct to license RDF assertions.

It also has the significant benefit that it gives me, a human, reading
the document a pointer to something that describes what assertions
might be licensed. Without the profile, this is *and must be* only a
vanilla XHTML document where the about and property attributes are
totally ignored.

                                        Be seeing you,
                                          norm

-- 
Norman Walsh <ndw@nwalsh.com> | Reality is what refuses to go away when
http://nwalsh.com/            | I stop believing in it.--Philip K. Dick

Received on Monday, 3 March 2008 18:55:59 UTC