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

Re: Agenda for telco, 2011-11-17

From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 20:18:16 +0000
Cc: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Message-Id: <EB8A4805-414C-4EA5-A525-A768086BD3D1@jenitennison.com>
To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>

On 16 Nov 2011, at 18:31, Gregg Kellogg wrote:
> On Nov 16, 2011, at 7:30 AM, Ivan Herman wrote:
>> 
>> On Nov 16, 2011, at 16:23 , Ivan Herman wrote:
>>> - ISSUE-113: Add the value attribute of the HTML data element as a possible literal target for property
>>> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/113
>> 
>> Yes
> 
> +1: This is interesting, as <data @value> is intended to be "machine readable" data, which I interpret to mean having a datatype. It is specifically intended when the machine-readable value is different from a human readable format. This would imply to me that doing a lexical matching over a larger set of XSD datatypes would be appropriate, but it's not called out explicitly.


My strong feeling is that you shouldn't sniff datatypes based on the content of the value attribute -- it's too magic. But not giving the value a language would be good.

Jeni
-- 
Jeni Tennison
http://www.jenitennison.com
Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2011 20:18:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:55:18 GMT