- From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 12:31:23 +0000
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: RDF Web Applications Working Group WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>, sysbot+tracker@w3.org
On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:07:59 +0100 Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > Toby wrote: >> 1. Ditch the magic behaviour of the <head> and <body> elements in >> HTML+RDFa. Preferably in XHTML+RDFa too. > > What this means is that the processing would begin by not having a > subject at all. No, it wouldn't. From RDFa 1.1 Core: | At the beginning of processing, an initial evaluation context is | created, as follows: | * the base is set to the URI of the document (or another value | specified in a language specific manner such as the HTML base | element); | * the parent subject is set to the base value; > IN any case, lots of backward compatibility issues: although I dislike > them, but all those stylesheet triples would disappear, because they > are almost always generated through the <head> and its magic > property. Nope, they wouldn't disappear. The initial evalutaion context would set the subject to be the document's base URI, so stylesheet triples would pick up that as their subject by default. > Toby wrote: >> 2. Say that the magic behaviour of <head> and <body> only kicks in >> when the <head> or <body> element carries the @typeof attribute. >> Preferably in XHTML+RDFa too. > > I do not think that works. I may have very legitimate reasons to use > <body typeof="T"> > ie, to create a blank node of type 'T'. Well, you're out of luck, because that will already fail in XHTML+RDFa 1.0 and 1.1 - it will set the rdf:type of the document's base URI, not a blank node. -- Toby A Inkster <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2011 12:30:36 UTC