- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 14:53:40 +0200
- To: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Cc: RDF Web Applications Working Group <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>, sysbot+tracker@w3.org
Toby, I am afraid this would not be a workable solution for the original problem. The problem[1] is that lambda users will use the, say, @rel="nofollow" attribute, they may not do any validation, ie, they will see the problem. Declaring the combination non-comforming will not help. Ivan [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2012Apr/0073.html On May 21, 2012, at 13:50 , Toby Inkster wrote: > 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> > > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Monday, 21 May 2012 12:50:45 UTC