Ivan Herman wrote: >>> - Is the following acceptable: @prefix="aa=" >>> my option would be no, this is an error, and the RDFa >>> processor should simply ignore that >> I believe that the current regex would not match "aa=" and would thus >> ignore it. However, if one were to do prefix="aa= bb=http://foo.com", >> that may cause an issue. We should really have a couple of approved test >> cases for these error conditions in the Design Suite. I'll try and take >> an action to create some valid Design Suite test cases for @prefix. > > Ie, we agree that this is an error, right? Yes, it is an error. > Ivan wrote: >> >> Manu Sporny wrote: >> >> * It would be easier for the parser writers to handle. >> >> > > > > I am not sure of that... > > I retract this! I just ran into the situation while testing and, > indeed, it can be a bit tricky if there is nothing on the left side of > the '='. It becomes more complicated to differentiate between > > a=AAA =qqq > > that might have been a legitimate use with qqq being a default > namespace and > > a= AAA=qqq > > which is the 'illegal' usage of an empty URI (the point below). It's because of this point that I think that "DEFAULTNS" would be preferable to a blank prefix identifier for changing the default namespace. I believe that we end up with a non-deterministic case if we allow arbitrary spaces between mappings and the equal sign AND try and use a blank prefix identifier to change the default namespace. -- manu -- Manu Sporny President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: A Collaborative Distribution Model for Music http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2009/04/04/collaborative-music-model/Received on Friday, 1 May 2009 14:13:24 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 1 May 2009 14:13:24 GMT