- From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 12:50:10 +0100
- To: RDF Web Applications Working Group <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: sysbot+tracker@w3.org
On Tue, 24 Apr 2012 06:45:00 +0000 RDF Web Applications Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org> wrote: > Option #1: ignore @rel if it only includes HTML Link types as defined > at http://www.w3.org/TR/html5-author/links.html#linkTypes > > Option #2: ignore @rel if it does not include any explicit CURIE. Here's another option that I thought of this morning. Option #3: RDFa processors honour @rel as usual, but RDFa documents are non-conforming if rel is used with a non-CURIE, non-URI token within the scope of @vocab. Conformance checkers MUST report this. This way document authors get told about the potential ambiguity, and are required to resolve it to achieve a conforming document, and RDFa parsing is consistent between XHTML+RDFa and HTML+RDFa, which helps people who want to author polyglot XHTML/HTML content. -- Toby A Inkster <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Monday, 21 May 2012 11:48:50 UTC