- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 21 Jun 2007 07:56:58 -0500
- To: mark.birbeck@x-port.net
- Cc: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>, RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 10:47 +0100, Mark Birbeck wrote: > Hi Dan, > > Since RDFa could be processed server-side by pipeline tools, and > client-side by an assortment of parsers, then I think it's legitimate > to have different ways that RDFa might be spotted. My interpretation > of the proposal under discussion is that it would give us the > following scenarios: > > No DTD and no profile: it's legitimate to run an RDFa parser over an > HTML/XHTML document, but you might not find anything. This issue is about the case where you do find an RDFa attribute (about/resource/etc); how do you know that the author meant it in the RDFa sense? > At worse you > might find things like <a rel="license" ... >, etc., which are already > defined by HTML/XHTML. No, at worse you get some triples out that the author didn't intend because s/he didn't mean the markup to have RDFa meaning. With no DTD and no profile, you can run an RDFa parser, but I don't see how you can legitimately hold the author to the triples you get out. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 21 June 2007 12:57:02 UTC