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

Re: comments from PFWG on RDFa in XHTML spec

From: Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>
Date: Thu, 22 May 2008 09:33:48 -0400
Message-Id: <675E4B0A-9E15-4FDE-9236-50A251D20995@IEEE.org>
Cc: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org, wai-liaison@w3.org
To: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>


On 8 May 2008, at 12:46 AM, Ben Adida wrote:

> Let us know if this is an acceptable resolution to this portion of  
> your comments.

Yes, we can live with this disposition of our comment.
http://www.w3.org/2008/05/21-pf-minutes.html#item06

Thank you for the careful consideration of this issue.

Al
/chair, PFWG

> Al,
>
> In a comment on April 3rd [1], you said
>
> =======
> 2.2 Issues with @content (section 6.3.1.1)
>
> @content may be used to indicate a plain literal which would
> overwrite the element content for RDF generation purposes.
>
>
> (a) What is the rationale for having the @content value replace the
> element content in terms of RDF statements?  Why not make the
> @content value an alternative object in the statement (with the
> element content being the other alternative object)?  - This would
> give the end user the option to choose between the two alternatives.
>
>
> (b) The use of @content bears the drawback that its value cannot be
> marked up.  The most prominent need for markup of text for assistive
> technology is the indication of language.  The spec addresses this
> issue (section 6.3.1.1.1) by making a sibling @xml:lang reign over
> @content.  However, this does not solve the problem of language
> changes inside the @content value (foreign words).   We propose to
> add a note that warns about the drawback of @content with regard to
> marking up foreign words within its value, and recommend using the
> (marked-up) element content instead of @content, wherever possible.
> =======
>
>
> In last week's telecon, we agreed that this point needs to be made  
> clearer in the specification. The issue is inescapable: the point  
> of @content is to override the rendered text. But we should  
> encourage people to use @content only when necessary. Thus our  
> resolution, that we
>
> "note that the use of @content prohibits the inclusion of rich  
> markup in your content. If the inline content of an element is what  
> you are trying to convey, then documents should rely upon that  
> rather than duplicating that content using the @content attribute."
>
> Let us know if this is an acceptable resolution to this portion of  
> your comments. Thanks!
>
> -Ben Adida
> Chair, RDFa Task Force.
>
>
> [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/ 
> 2008Apr/0031.html
>
Received on Thursday, 22 May 2008 13:34:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 22 May 2008 13:34:45 GMT