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

Re: Test 0218 : empty lists

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Thu, 03 May 2012 00:23:05 -0400
Message-ID: <4FA20829.8030006@digitalbazaar.com>
To: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.com>
CC: W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
On 05/01/2012 01:29 AM, Alex Milowski wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 30, 2012 at 8:35 PM, Gregg
> Kellogg<gregg@greggkellogg.net>  wrote:
>> This is implied in the previous step where it says "next item in
>> the ‘bnode’ array or, if that does not exist,
>> http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#nil". You're right that
>>  it's not spelled out explicitly.
>
> I'm not sure I agree.  I think the specification doesn't say that
> and I don't see it being implied.  That was certainly not the reading
> I took when I implemented it.

Hi Alex,

The RDFa Core spec editor and I discussed this and have made an
editorial change that should make this much more clear. Please see the
change here:

https://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-core/#PS-Lists

If you are happy with this change, please respond to this e-mail as soon
as possible and let us know as we're under a very tight schedule for PR.
We will have an official response to you after the telecon tomorrow, but
the sooner you respond, the better. If you are not happy with the
change, please let us know exactly why you are not and what change would
result in a positive response from you.

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: PaySwarm Website for Developers Launched
http://digitalbazaar.com/2012/02/22/new-payswarm-alpha/
Received on Thursday, 3 May 2012 04:23:37 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 3 May 2012 04:23:37 GMT