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

Re: HTML+RDFa Issues (update)

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 09 Jul 2009 19:25:34 +0200
Message-ID: <4A56280E.4070205@gmx.de>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
CC: RDFa mailing list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Manu Sporny wrote:
>> With "urn:rights" there is the problem that the consumer gets the wrong
>> URI, and furthermore there's a real risk that it could get the same
>> string from a different party, trying to identify a *different* link
>> relation.
> 
> Right - but what damage is done at that point? How does that ambiguity
> translate into a fatal error in an application or a logic error in a
> reasoning agent?

I think that's pretty obvious, right? Two different relations would be 
treated as a single one.

> ...
> So, we approached it from the standpoint that not being able to place
> URLs in @rel/@rev is too restrictive and that we should try to change that.

Sounds good.

> I believe the consensus during the call today was on an approach that
> would change the CURIE processing rules such that anything without a
> prefix mapping is understood as a URL by default. This would allow URLs
> to be used in @rel/@rev.

Which is good.

It's still not optimal that adding an xmlns declaration somewhere else 
would affect the semantics, though. (And yes, I understand that the 
problem can only be *fully* resolved by either breaking RDFa or 
URIs-in-rel-values, which is exactly why I did complain loudly one year 
ago).

> ...

BR, Julian
Received on Thursday, 9 July 2009 17:26:24 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 9 July 2009 17:26:24 GMT