- From: Dominik Tomaszuk <ddooss@wp.pl>
- Date: Tue, 22 May 2012 16:02:47 +0200
- To: public-rww@w3.org
- CC: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, Shane P McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
On 22.05.2012 13:56, Toby Inkster wrote: > On Tue, 22 May 2012 13:21:02 +0200 > Dominik Tomaszuk<ddooss@wp.pl> wrote: > >> So an example in [2] isn't correct. >> [2] >> http://www.w3.org/community/rww/wiki/Pingback#Writing_a_Pingback_Service > > Well, the example doesn't include a @value attribute at all, so whether > @value is supported is irrelevant. > > The example would produce these triples: > > @prefix pingback:<http://purl.org/net/pingback/> . > <> a pingback:Container ; > pingback:source ""@en ; > pingback:target ""@en . > > If the<input> elements had @value attributes with values "foo" and > "bar" it would be: > > @prefix pingback:<http://purl.org/net/pingback/> . > <> a pingback:Container ; > pingback:source "foo"@en ; > pingback:target "bar"@en . Yes, but pingback:source and pingback:target are usually URI. In HTML5 version it produces literal. BTW, It's sad that it does not work with XHTML1. But if we use XHTML5 it will be possible. > To cope with the literal versus resource thing, the processing rules > could possibly be further modified to deal with: > > <input type="url"> +1 Best, Dominik Tomaszuk
Received on Tuesday, 22 May 2012 14:03:45 UTC