- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Jul 2010 12:35:49 -0400
- To: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Hey folks, We didn't have enough people on the call today to make a binding resolution on ISSUE-36. The issue remains open. However, there was text added to the specification that expresses what we believe to be consensus at this point: 1. Allow RDFa Profile documents to specify a default vocabulary. 2. Declare the property used to specify a default vocabulary as 'rdfa:vocabulary'. The text can be found in step 5 of section 9: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-core/#s_profiles This notification is being sent out because we're bending protocol slightly in order to publish a more consistent spec on RDFa Profiles. We would normally like to do a resolution before adding anything to the specification. However, since we are publishing a Heartbeat draft, if we left this particular language out, the spec wouldn't hang together as well as it does with the language included. That said, there is still plenty of opportunity to remove the language for any reason when we discuss a binding resolution for ISSUE-36, which may be as soon as next week. If you have an issue with the ability of an RDFa Profile document to change the default vocabulary please let this working group know of you objection. -- manu -- Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny) President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: WebApp Security - A jQuery Javascript-native SSL/TLS library http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2010/07/20/javascript-tls-1/ http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2010/07/20/javascript-tls-2/
Received on Thursday, 29 July 2010 16:36:18 UTC