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

Re: comment/question on the latest RDFa editor's draft: role attribute

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 08 May 2008 18:42:55 +0200
Message-ID: <48232D8F.6060304@w3.org>
To: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
CC: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webBackplane.com>, W3C RDFa task force <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>


Shane McCarron wrote:
> 
> 
>> which has an added bonus: we do not have a dependency on the 
>> advancement of the Role module as a recommendation (I am not sure what 
>> the timetable is there, with a bit of bad luck we might be suspended 
>> to go to Rec!)
> I am happy to make this simple change.  I do not believe we had a 
> dependency on the Role document anyway, since it was not a "normative" 
> reference.  At least it should not have been.  But that's fine.
>>
>> I also have a conformance question: is an RDFa implementation supposed 
>> to check the resources associated to @rel="role"?
> What do you mean "check the resources" ?
> 

If I understand it correctly,

<span rel="role" resource="[xhv:copyright]">...</span>

should not be valid (xhv being the XHTML namespace) because is it not 
one of the values defined as a permitted value for 'role' in the 
namespace document (although 'copyright' _is_ a defined term in the xhv 
namespace). So my question is: should an RDFa processor check this and 
ignore the triple? Or should it generate the triple nevertheless?

Ivan


> 

-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf


Received on Thursday, 8 May 2008 16:43:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 8 May 2008 16:43:30 GMT