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

Re: ISSUE-137 (Media Type): HTML+RDFa should normatively declare media types and describe how to identify relative to XHTML+RDFa 1.1 [RDFa 1.1 in HTML5]

From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.com>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2012 18:26:39 -0700
Message-ID: <CABp3FNJc+kD4bfbtz6YbxFkR0uV_5=_Sj04n+xKGc1mcfiXxUg@mail.gmail.com>
To: W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net> wrote:
> Basically, if I see text/html, I use HTML+RDFa. If I see application/xhtml+xml, I use XHTML+RDFa if I see "xhtml" in DOCTYPE. Otherwise, I use HTML+RDFa.

What I just implemented to test this is more based on inspecting the
DOM.  My chrome extension will automatically run on any HTML flavor of
document as well as for XML media types.  As such, I'm post
content-type inspection.  A firefox extension could handle that

The same would be true if your just included my Javascript library in
your web page.

Afterwards, I check as follows:

XHTML+RDFa 1.1 iff  (document.documentElement.localName=="html"  and
document.documentElement.getAttribute("version")=="XHTML+RDFa 1.1")
HTML+RDFa 1.1 iff (document.documentElement.localName=="html"  ||
XML otherwise

That means, in comparison to what you've done, I'm going to process
more XHTML documents with HTML+RDFa 1.1.  I'm not sure there is a
right answer here for all processors/user agent combinations.

It would be nice if there was a consistent answer for a certain class
of user agents (e.g. browsers).

--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

Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
Received on Thursday, 26 April 2012 01:27:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:56 UTC