W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > January 2009

Re: Discussion with Ian and Henri about HTML5+RDFa (part 2/2)

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Mon, 26 Jan 2009 12:59:15 +0100
Message-ID: <497DA593.2050807@gmx.de>
To: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>
CC: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, RDFa mailing list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>

Mark Birbeck wrote:
> ...
> The other model that was considered was that @rel contains a URI. In
> this case @rel="next" is actually a relative path, and we would
> hard-code the fact that it's relative to a 'base' that is the XHTML
> vocabulary. Unfortunately that puts @rel="foo" also into the XHTML
> vocabulary, and it also means that for authors to add their own values
> they need to express them as full URIs, which is quite laborious and
> error-prone.
> ...

For the record: I'm still VERY unhappy with the fact that RDFa imposes a 
syntax on the rel attribute that is likely to be incompatible with the 
way it's used elsewhere (sticking plain URIs into it).

Requiring CURIEs for *new* attributes is fine, but imposing a 
potentially non-backwards compatible syntax onto existing attributes is 
an entirely different story...

BR, Julian
Received on Monday, 26 January 2009 12:00:03 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 26 January 2009 12:00:04 GMT