- From: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
- Date: Tue, 27 Jan 2009 09:59:15 -0800
- To: Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>
- CC: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Philip Taylor wrote: > One of those uses <a href="www.invaligia.com" > property="cc:attributionName" rel="cc:attributionURL"> which means it's > talking about the nonexistent page > http://www.invaligia.com/www.invaligia.com Interesting, because that will also create a clickable link that is broken. In other words, with RDFa, if you've got broken triples, you often have broken rendered HTML, too (not always, but it helps.) > Two are not well-formed XML within the Creative Commons block of markup; > the other two are not well-formed XML in the rest of the page. So it's > not possible to extract the RDFa with an XML parser -- you would have to > use an HTML parser instead (and presumably add hacks to emulate XML > Namespace processing). Most RDFa parsers are able to handle broken XHTML, by using tidy or by using whatever the browser DOM generates. > Somewhat relatedly, there's another four pages that use rel="dc:type". > One of those (http://bytestrike.blogspot.com/) has it near a CC license > link and does not have an xmlns:dc declaration anywhere, suggesting a > copy-and-paste error. Looks like it's broken in a more subtle way: ==== <span dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" href="http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text" rel="dc:type"> ==== it says "dc" instead of "xmlns:dc". Wonder how that happened. Good to see this info! > I should probably try downloading some more recent pages, to see if > CC/RDFa usage is more common now... If you have time and resources to do so, that would be very useful! -Ben
Received on Tuesday, 27 January 2009 17:59:52 UTC