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

Re: LC comments on RDFa Core 1.1

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Jan 2011 09:14:49 -0600
Message-ID: <4D35AE69.2050600@aptest.com>
To: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
This is a DRAFT reply to Michael on his (editorial) last call comments.  
If there are no objections, I will send this on as our formal response.

On 12/5/2010 12:00 PM, Michael Hausenblas wrote:
> All,
>
> I promised Manu feedback on RDFa Core 1.1 LC [1] and you can believe me that
> I tried very hard to find major issues but failed (which is not surprising
> given the long and hard work on this document ;)
>
> So, overall the document reads very good and I think it is CR/PR ready. Some
> minor comments, though, you might want to consider addressing:
>
> + Section "6. CURIE Syntax Definition": I think the second paragraph would
> benefit from a rewording. The usage of '' and sentences such as "This
> specification does not define a default 'no prefix' mapping." are somewhat
> hard to digest. Further, the last paragraph:
>
> [[
> Note that the resulting URI must be a syntactically valid IRI [RFC3987
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-rdfa-core-20101026/#bib-RFC3987>  ]. For a more
> detailed explanation see CURIE and URI Processing
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-rdfa-core-20101026/#s_curieprocessing>  . Also
> note that while the lexical space of a CURIE is as defined in curie
> <http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-rdfa-core-20101026/#P_curie>   above, the value
> space is the set of IRIs.
> ]]
>
> ... should, IMHO be at the very beginning of this section.

I have moved this toward the top of the section - after the introductory 
paragraph.

> + The Section "7.5 Sequence" says: "This specification defines processing
> rules for optional  attributes that may not be present in all Host Languages
> (e.g., @href)." -->  I'd love to see a list of optional attribs somewhere in
> the document (did I overlook this?)

The list of attributes is defined in section 5 (Attributes and Syntax).  
This section identifies a few attributes as optional.

> + IMHO, Section "8.3 Object resolution" would benefit from an overview
> figure explaining the types of objects (you could reuse the "Diagram of RDF
> Classes, Attributes, Methods and linkages." [2]).

We are going to add a diagram (Ivan?)


> Congrats to the editors and the entire WG for this solid work - looking
> forward to see the REC!
>
> Cheers,
>        Michael
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-rdfa-core-20101026/
> [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-api/#the-rdf-interfaces
>

-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Tuesday, 18 January 2011 15:15:19 GMT

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