W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > January 2013

Re: [HTML+RDFa 1.1] section 3.1 and 2.1

From: Dr. Olaf Hoffmann <Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2013 15:52:35 +0100
To: public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
Message-Id: <201301311552.35309.Dr.O.Hoffmann@gmx.de>
Shane McCarron:
> Olaf,
> At the risk of sounding heretical.... if you are really concerned about
> future interpretation of your document, just use @version.  True, it will
> not validate as an HTML5 nor as an HTML5+RDFa document, but it won't hurt
> anything that it does not validate, and it will ensure that conforming RDFa
> processors always interpret your document the way you want them to.
> I know that is what my company plans to do.

If there is no version indication within a document, it is pointless
to validate at all - the result can never be mandatory, only an arbitrary 
Maybe one can check, whether such documents formally conform to XHTML1.1,
XHTML1.1+RDFa1.1 or the XML variant of HTML5 or that of HTML5+RDFa
etc, but one can never know, what the author really did, if the author does
not reveal such information.
If a variant of a format does not allow authors to reveal such information,
it gets pointless how to validate or interprete documents following such 
format variants -  it is the free choice of the reader/viewer, not that of 
the author ;o)
Therefore it is not heretical to construct your own variant, it only shows, 
that the current HTML5 draft does not solve such a fundamental intrinsic
problem, therefore you and your company have to create your own variant
to solve the problem.
But it could be interesting to specify the approach properly, that all
interested authors follow the same approach instead of forking (X)HTML 
at this point in infinite different private variants ;o)

Obviously, if you add something like version="XHTML5+RDFa 1.0" or
version="XHTML5+RDFa 1.1"  to your documents, you expect, that at least 
the RDFa processor will work properly? Interesting.
Or will you continue with something like version="XHTML+RDFa 1.1"
and using new features from the HTML5 draft anyway?

Received on Thursday, 31 January 2013 14:54:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:58 UTC