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

Re: HTML+RDFa Issues (update)

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:16:33 -0400
Message-ID: <4A4CEB71.8060804@intertwingly.net>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
CC: RDFa mailing list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Manu Sporny wrote:
> 
> = Use of regular CURIEs in @rel =
> 
> I believe that Julian Reschke has raised this issue several times. I
> don't remember the technical issue and I remember Ben stating clearly
> that there isn't a technical issue.
> 
> I don't have any input on this at the present time. Clearly, if a
> technical issue exists with CURIEs in @rel - we must address it.

If I remember correctly, the issue that Julian raised is that a number 
of potential "consumers" have created multiple, potentially incompatible 
ways of interpreting the value of the rel attribute.  Some may interpret 
it as a list of tokens, some as a list of URIs, and some as a list of 
CURIEs.

The technical issue is that it is theoretically possible to construct a 
rel value which has a list of URIs which could be accidentally 
interpreted as a list of CURIEs.  Consider the following:

<a xmlns:urn="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
    rel="urn:rights urn:uuid:1225c695-cfb8-4ebb-aaaa-80da344efa6a"
    href="http://example.com/terms_of_service.html" >

My take: while it is possible to construct such examples, in practice 
they would be rare enough to not be an issue.  That being said, it is 
nearly impossible to legislate against, as it would require people to 
avoid declaring namespaces prefix that matches any current or future URI 
scheme.  Perhaps a "SHOULD avoid well known URI schemes" might be in order.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Thursday, 2 July 2009 17:17:14 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 2 July 2009 17:17:15 GMT