- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Tue, 13 May 2008 16:44:10 -0500
- To: Dave Beckett <dajobe@gmail.com>
- CC: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Dave Beckett wrote: > I was quoting Manu's code: > [[ > // TODO: 2.1 The [current element] is parsed for xml:base and [base] is set > // to this value if it exists. -- manu (not in the processing rules > // yet) > ]] > > > However this may have changed in some later spec as I couldn't seen any > relevant section 2.1 in > http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/WD-rdfa-syntax-20080221 > I suggest > 1) you should update your spec to be clearer about this > > Appendix A - informative, and thus totally ignorable - says: > [[ > If a language includes @xml:base [XMLBASE], an RDFa parser for that > host language must process it, and use its value to set [base]. > ]] > > Yes - see http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Drafts#rdfa-syntax for a pointer to the latest version. In that version Appendix A is in fact removed, and we made it explicit that xml:base is not supported at all. > 2) Add a BAD test case using xml:base in your XHTML+... profile and > make it a requirement > to reject it or not return a response. > > If this was something you want to be pendantic about, add a machine test. > > Definitely. Manu, do we have one yet? If not, can you please add one? Should be pretty simple. -- 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, 13 May 2008 21:45:17 UTC