W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swd-wg@w3.org > July 2007

[RDFa] ISSUE-9: META and LINK in the body

From: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
Date: Wed, 04 Jul 2007 10:24:36 -0700
Message-ID: <468BD7D4.6080903@adida.net>
To: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>


Hi all,

ISSUE-9 was initially about nested META and LINK, but I'll use common
sense here and extend this issue to include the crux of what we're
thinking about right now, which is to kill LINK and META in the body
altogether, at least in XHTML1.1+RDFa.

I'm tempted to agree with Mark that LINK and META should no longer
appear in the body. That said, to play devil's advocate for a second, I
note that LINK and META do *not* get repositioned in the DOM when the
doc is served as application/xhtml+xml. I want to make sure we have all
data points in mind before we strike those from the spec.

In particular, I want to point out that *if* we do this, then we're
almost certainly forced to either have @href everywhere or @resource
everywhere to reenable the expression of certain triples, since
effectively we'll now want to place the @href/@resource on the parent
element of where the LINK used to be. We'll also have to consider what
to do to make it easier to do the following:

=====
<p>
<meta property="foaf:name">Mark Birbeck</meta>
...
</p>
=====

Maybe we think it's unlikely that the above will occur as is, that the P
has to be related to the rest of the page, so it will likely be:

=====
<p rel="dc:creator">
<span property="foaf:name">Mark Birbeck</span>
...
</p>
=====

where the @rel automatically stripes and sets a bnode subject.

I just want to put these issues out there so we're all thinking
carefully about the consequences of our actions as we speed towards
finalizing our spec!

-Ben
Received on Wednesday, 4 July 2007 17:24:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:17:29 GMT