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

ISSUE-26: RDFa-specific vs. Earl-like Processor Status vocabulary

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Jul 2010 11:19:26 -0400
Message-ID: <4C349AFE.20106@digitalbazaar.com>
To: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
A new section was added over this past weekend to outline how an RDFa
1.1 Processor will handle processor warnings and errors:

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/drafts/2010/ED-rdfa-core-20100705/#processor-status

The last remaining issue to wrap up ISSUE-26 is to settle on an RDFa
error vocabulary. We have two approaches to pick from.

The first re-uses the Evaluation And Report Language[1]:

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/wiki/Error_vocabulary#An_EARL-like_approach

The second is more specific to RDFa Processors:

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/wiki/Error_vocabulary#Simple_approach

If you have an opinion on way or the other, please make it known on this
mailing list. Ivan will author a vocabulary as soon as consensus is clear.

-- manu

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/EARL10-Guide/

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Myth Busting Web Stacks - PHP is Faster Than You Think
http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2010/06/12/myth-busting-php/2/
Received on Wednesday, 7 July 2010 15:19:56 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:55:07 GMT