W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > August 2010

Re: ISSUE-28: Re: 3 Minor issues spotted

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Sun, 01 Aug 2010 20:39:34 +0100
Message-ID: <4C55CD76.20100@webr3.org>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
CC: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Manu Sporny wrote:
> On 06/19/2010 10:31 AM, Nathan wrote:
>> During my previous exercise I spotted a few little things, as follows:
>> DataContext::setMapping (in DOMString prefix, in DOMString iri);
>> Perhaps could be
>> DataContext::setMapping (in DOMString prefix, in IRI iri);
> When creating the RDFa API, we wanted to ensure that most of the API
> could be utilized by using strings. In other words, we didn't want to
> make people create IRI objects just to pass them into the RDFa API
> methods when a simple string would convey the information needed by the
> RDFa API. In other words, this:
> DataContext.setMapping("foaf", "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/");
> is better than this:
> DataContext.setMapping("foaf", IRI("http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"));
> Does that rationale resonate with you?

~ish, really need a Valid-IRI-String which could be either an IRI or a 
string I guess - certainly needs to accept both (imho).

all else - great, and thanks for getting back to me,


Received on Sunday, 1 August 2010 19:40:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:48 UTC