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

Re: Mixing @id and @about on the same element

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Thu, 11 Jun 2009 17:14:25 -0500
Message-ID: <4A3181C1.10607@aptest.com>
To: Toby A Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
CC: RDFa Developers <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>

Toby A Inkster wrote:
>
> The issue included in the TF minutes is not really including @id and 
> @about on the same element - there's nothing wrong with that, but 
> rather trying to use the same fragment identifier (hence the same URI) 
> to refer to two separate things. (In the SKOS case, they use the same 
> URI to identify both a document fragment and an rdf:Property.)
Yes.  And I maintain that the TAG has debated this for ages.  I don't 
pretend to understand the debate, but it seems to focus upon using 
request Accept headers to determine what the requester wanted, and then 
status codes (303? 304?) or responses to provide the values the 
requester wanted (e.g., I want a document fragment that is text/html, or 
I want authoritative representation of this  URI iI have followed my 
nose to as application/rdf+xml, or whatever). 

I think that this basic issue of content negotiation / semantic 
interpretation is WAY outside of the scope of RDFa.  Second, I can't see 
how this matters except in the most "how many angels are on the head of 
this pin" sort of way.  If what we are being asked to do is give best 
practice guidance, then I think that we should defer to the experts on 
semweb content negotiation.  Surely that's not us?

-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Thursday, 11 June 2009 22:15:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 11 June 2009 22:15:23 GMT