Re: Resolving remaining issues in the issue tracker

For the records, I will answer the various issues separately

Ivan

On Jan 7, 2013, at 03:40 , Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote:

> Hey folks,
> 
> I did a sweep through the open issues that we have in the issue tracker.
> Here are the proposals that I think will have consensus among the group.
> Just capturing it all in one place to make our discussion this Thursday
> go a bit more smoothly:
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ISSUE-143: Prefixes too complicated
> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/143
> 
> We discussed this issue and made a number of resolutions. We're awaiting
> feedback from Tab before sending him an official response.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ISSUE-144: Add @itemref-like attribute
> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/144
> 
> An experimental feature has been added to HTML+RDFa 1.1 called "Property
> Copying" which achieves what Microdata's @itemref achieves.
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-in-html/Overview-src.html
> 
> PROPOSAL: Adopt the 'Property Copying' feature as described in the
> 2013-01-06 HTML+RDFa Editors Draft.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ISSUE-145: @content override @value
> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/145
> 
> PROPOSAL: When both @content and @value appear on the same HTML element,
> the value of @content MUST be used.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ISSUE-146: HTML5+RDFa needs rule for implied @about="" on head/body	
> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/146
> 
> No it doesn't, we resolved this here:
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/meetings/2011-12-08#resolution_2
> 
> RESOLVED: Modify HTML+RDFa and XHTML+RDFa to modify processing steps #5
> and #6 from assuming an empty @about value to assuming that new subject
> is set to the parent object.
> 
> We messed up and included that rule in XHTML+RDFa 1.1. We should publish
> a PER for that spec with the rules for an empty about="" on HEAD and BODY.
> 
> PROPOSAL: Close issue 146 with no change to HTML+RDFa. Remove the rules
> for injecting an empty about="" for XHTML+RDFa and issue a PER for that
> document.
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> ISSUE-147: Preserve markup by default
> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/147
> 
> We are trying to get Sebastian on an RDFa WG telecon so that we can
> discuss this issue with him in more depth. However, a number of the WG
> members have voiced their reservations about changing this behavior in
> HTML+RDFa 1.1.
> 
> PROPOSAL: Do not change the HTML+RDFa 1.1 rules to preserve markup by
> default.
> 
> -- manu
> 
> -- 
> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
> blog: The Problem with RDF and Nuclear Power
> http://manu.sporny.org/2012/nuclear-rdf/
> 


----
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