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

Re: Test Case 0109 / XHTML+RDFa 1.1 (ISSUE-139)

From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 20:00:05 -0400
To: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.com>
CC: W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <7FB0A12B-16B5-42BB-A73B-5812FED18856@greggkellogg.net>
On Apr 27, 2012, at 2:51 PM, Alex Milowski wrote:

> Test case 109 has this content:
> 
> <!-- This a NOT a valid XHTML document (due to @xml:base) -->
>      <div xml:base="http://example.org/invalid/">
>         <p about="">This is <span property="dc:title">Test 0109</span>.</p>
>      </div>
> 
> I believe this test case is either invalid or unenforceable.  xml:base
> is an expected feature in many environments (including most browsers).
> Even though some schemata for XHTML may not allow the attribute, its
> presence will change the base URI.  Any DOM processor, like mine, will
> not be able get the answer expected.  In fact, it shouldn't because
> the base URI is determined by intrinsic processing of the document by
> the browser and no other interpretation for an XML document is allowed
> per the XML Base specification.

I've never understood why this restriction has been in place, unless it comes out of XHTML2. Indeed, microdata obeys xml:base, due to the HTML5 content model. Perhaps we should re-introduce this as being allowed in XHTML5.

I created ISSUE-139 on your behalf to track this.

Gregg

> -- 
> --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 Saturday, 28 April 2012 00:00:42 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Saturday, 28 April 2012 00:00:42 GMT