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

Re: Does RDFa processing recurse into content:encoded?

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Mar 2010 20:59:28 -0400
Message-ID: <4B9D8670.2020206@digitalbazaar.com>
To: Stephane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
CC: public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
On 03/12/2010 04:36 AM, Toby Inkster wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-03-11 at 16:30 -0500, Stephane Corlosquet wrote:
>> I gave a quick glance at the open issues [1] but I could not find any
>> on this topic, or this handled as part of another issue?
> 
> As I see it there are two related questions:
> 
> 1. Given a node that has no datatype attribute and non-textnode content,
> such as:
> 
> 	<span property="ex:foobar">Albert <b>Einstein</b></span>
> 
> Should RDFa 1.1 generate an XMLLiteral (like RDFa 1.0 does), or generate
> a plain literal (like most people seem to prefer)?

I believe that this one already exists:

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/19

> 2. When an XMLLiteral is generated, in RDFa 1.0 descendant elements are
> skipped for parsing. In RDFa 1.1, should we require descendant elements
> to be parsed, should we keep the RDFa 1.0 behaviour, or should we
> provide a mechanism for page authors to decide?

Just created this one:

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/20

We are now tracking both of these issues, does that alleviate your
concern, Stephane?

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: PaySwarming Goes Open Source
http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2010/02/01/bitmunk-payswarming/
Received on Monday, 15 March 2010 01:00:00 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:55:06 GMT