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

Re: wdrs:describedby = @rel describedby. Erratum published

From: Phil Archer <phila@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 09 Nov 2010 23:28:17 +0000
Message-ID: <4CD9D911.8040800@w3.org>
To: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
CC: nathan@webr3.org, public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
Thanks Toby,

Yes, I knew rel="meta" has been used for HTML->RDF for ages and that was 
part of why we didn't adopt it for wdrs. The idea was to ensure that it 
really was format neutral.

As for the (non) use of camel case, that was because POWDER is 
essentially XML (that can be GRDDLed into OWL) and so we stuck with the 
XML convention of everything being lower case.

Design decisions like that always come down to what the folk in the room 
think on the day, but those were the reasons.

Phil.

On 09/11/2010 23:11, Toby Inkster wrote:
> On Tue, 09 Nov 2010 19:28:09 +0000
> Phil Archer<phila@w3.org>  wrote:
>
>> Checking through http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab/, I don't see
>> describedby (any capitalisation) in any section. But there is a
>> definition of meta. I /think/ this is the only definition of this
>> term, despite it having been in common use for a long time?
>
> rel="meta" is defined in the drafts of XHTML2. XHTML2's keywords fed
> into the RDFa work, so it's subsequently defined in the XHTML+RDFa 1.0
> Rec. XHTML+RDFa 1.1 and HTML+RDFa will define it indirectly via the
> XHTML vocabulary.
>
> It's also the method of linking to RDF from HTML which has been
> recommended by the FOAF project for ages.
>
Received on Tuesday, 9 November 2010 23:28:50 UTC

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