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

ISSUE-81: Make declarative definition normative, procedural definition informative. Triage of Issue 75 - Part 3 [LC Comment - RDFa Core 1.1]

From: RDFa Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:31:33 +0000
To: public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1PgI1V-0006HZ-GP@barney.w3.org>

ISSUE-81: Make declarative definition normative, procedural definition informative. Triage of Issue 75 - Part 3 [LC Comment - RDFa Core 1.1]

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/81

Raised by: Steven Pemberton
On product: LC Comment - RDFa Core 1.1

Normative
Jeni Tennison:

Information about how to process RDFa documents is defined in both:

* Section 7.5 Sequence
* Section 8 RDFa Processing in Detail

When I was implementing RDFa 1.0, I found this particularly problematic. I ended up trusting Section 7.5 (or whatever it was then) and ignoring Section 8. What I would like to see is one of these sections becoming non-normative, so that there is a single authoritative place within the spec that defines how to process RDFa.

FWIW, I generally prefer a declarative definition to a procedural one, but Section 8 is written more as a sequence of examples than a detailed definition of RDFa processing, so of the two I think that it should be the one made non-normative.
Received on Friday, 21 January 2011 14:31:35 GMT

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