W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > January 2011

Re: Last Call Response to ISSUE-60: XMLLiteral context preservation

From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2011 02:44:35 -0500
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
CC: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <DB1ADD4B-7448-4872-BDFF-B526C0D1497F@kellogg-assoc.com>
Yes, this is the solution I was looking for, and how my processors currently handle it. I'm happy with the resolution.

Gregg

On Jan 16, 2011, at 6:02 PM, Manu Sporny wrote:

> Hi Gregg,
> 
> This is an official response from the RDFa Working Group concerning your
> comment on prefix preservation during the creation of XMLLiterals:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/60
> 
> Gregg Kellogg wrote:
>> Is there new wording for RDFa core 1.1 7.5 step 11 on what needs to
>> be done for XMLLiteral context preservation? I recall that this was
>> essentially going to revert to just xmlns preservation for all
>> in-scope definitions.
> 
> The RDFa Working Group discussed this issue last week, the discussion is
> captured in the minutes:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/meetings/2011-01-13#ISSUE__2d_60__3a__XMLLiteral_context_preservation
> 
> The conversation revolved around how complicated the processing rules
> would become if we were to preserve everything that could potentially
> affect triple processing. That is, in order to re-create the proper
> triples, an RDFa processor would need to preserve @xmlns, @prefix,
> @profile, @vocab, <base>, and the current subject. Furthermore,
> processing would need to be performed on any URL that was relative to
> the current document when adding these attributes to the top-most level
> of an XMLLiteral.
> 
> In general, there was concern that the payback for preserving all of
> this state would be minimal and not worth the added complexity to the
> specification.
> 
> The group decided that the behavior of RDFa 1.0 is sufficient for almost
> every use case. That is, only values declared via xmlns: are preserved
> in XMLLiterals generated via RDFa Processors.
> 
> If a web developer would like to ensure that the same triples are
> generated if the XMLLiteral snippet is processed by itself, it is up to
> them to include the proper subject, prefixes, and profiles in the
> intended XMLLiteral.
> 
> Thank you for your feedback and your continued input into the RDFa
> Working Group, Gregg. There have been a number of changes and
> improvements made due to your feedback over the past and the RDFa
> specification is better for it.
> 
> Since this is a Last Call issue, we ask that you please respond to this
> e-mail and let us know if this solution works for you.
> 
> -- manu
> 
> -- 
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
> President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: Linked Data in JSON
> http://digitalbazaar.com/2010/10/30/json-ld/
Received on Monday, 17 January 2011 07:46:04 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:55:08 GMT