W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > April 2012

Re: RDFa Lite 1.1 Conformance Section - host language attributes (ISSUE-136)

From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 09:31:21 -0700
Message-ID: <CABp3FN+Ei8vr-4G3Te07GrO=i7ekJP_ny9JXCQ=7oiwbE4ZSxA@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 9:22 AM, Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com> wrote:
> Actually, I think "RDFa Lite" conformant is a silly concept anyway.  You
> either use RDFa or you do not.  It is not conforming for a processor to
> handle only RDFa Lite, so I don't see how saying that a document only uses
> RDFa Lite attributes has any value or meaning.
>
> Regardless, an HTML5+RDFa document would be conforming if it used @rel in
> places where HTML5+RDFa allows that attribute.  As long as it validates, it
> is conforming.

For the most part, this is much more succinct way of saying what I was
trying to say.  HTML allows the attributes and if an author uses them,
it should not affect conformance. I only slightly disagree in that
conformance isn't silly in that it is good to know whether or not you
are following the rules when it comes to authoring an RDFa Lite
document.  Maybe we need to clarify that conformance is scoped to
authoring and not to "processing" the document?

The processor must follow the same rules when extracting triples via
RDFa and that is where I don't want to go mucking around and changing
semantics just to preserve some expected behavior.  If you use @rel
and things change, then you may have to adjust your use of RDFa to get
the right outcome.

-- 
--Alex Milowski
"The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the
inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language
considered."

Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2012 16:31:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:55:20 GMT