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

Re: Error in the XHTML Profile

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Sat, 4 Dec 2010 10:31:57 +0100
Cc: W3C RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Message-Id: <9D71C361-B19C-44B1-8AA1-3988F0CE2AA9@w3.org>
To: Shane P McCarron <shane@aptest.com>, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
Shane, Toby,

for the good order:

- Shane, I believe there is an agreement that the current XHTML vocab file is buggy. This is just an editorial issue, not really a LC issue; ie, unless there is an opposition in the group, this should be handled. If you want, I can do it, but I do not want to touch the file without your authorization...
- Toby, I think that the possible addition of the describedby term is a Last Call comment, and should be treated as such; ie, a new issue should be raised and handled by the working group... Could you do that?

Thanks

Ivan



On Dec 1, 2010, at 12:47 , Ivan Herman wrote:

> 
> On Dec 1, 2010, at 12:12 , Toby Inkster wrote:
> 
>> On Wed, 2010-12-01 at 11:02 +0100, Ivan Herman wrote:
>>> Victor Andrée (cc-d) contacted me a few days ago because he found some
>>> bug in my newest pyRdfa code. However... one issue was not my bug but
>>> yours:-)
>> 
>> I volunteered to rewrite the XHTML vocab a few months ago. My rewrite is
>> here:
>> 
>> http://buzzword.org.uk/2010/xhtml-vocab-20101110.xhtml
>> 
>> It still needs a few changes I think:
>> 
>> * We should discuss whether to include "describedby" in the profile
>> mapping to <http://www.w3.org/2007/05/powder-s#describedby>. This
>> relationship is used by POWDER and XRD/WebFinger, so it might be
>> nice to adopt it. We should have a resolution to adopt it or not.
>> 
> 
> +1
> 
>> * We should adopt a revision policy for the document. I'd suggest a
>> policy of: new terms are added via W3C Recs. A mailing list is
>> provided for the announcement of new terms. New terms must be
>> announced on that list either three months before they're added
>> to the vocab, or when the spec defining them hits Last Call -
>> whichever comes first! This allows the vocab to change over time,
>> but also gives implementers reasonable security in hard-coding
>> or aggressively caching the vocab.
>> 
> 
> It is unclear to me who will 'own' this document. The terms we would add are not (necessarily) for RDFa only, right?
> 
> Ivan
> 
> 
>> * The information above the Introduction section needs revising in
>> that the XHTML2 Working Group is ceasing to exist within the W3C.
>> 
>> But once those issues are resolved, it would be nice to publish the
>> updated vocabulary document.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Toby A Inkster
>> <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk>
>> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
>> 
> 
> 
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf







Received on Saturday, 4 December 2010 09:29:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:50 UTC