On 1/5/09 05:54, Ed Summers wrote: > Yes, I argued for removing the RDFa to avoid having to answer this > question ... and also the problem of keeping the html in sync with the > rdf/xml, n-triples and turtle views. Seems to me this is something the SWD WG ought to have a position on, since it has two key deliverables: SKOS (a language for talking about representations of topics and their inter-relationships) and RDFa (a language to allow XHTML documents to describe their topic in machine-friendly form). If we can't always deploy the two together, we need a pretty compelling explanation about why, when etc the two are compatible. If both are to be W3C recommendations, it seems natural to use them together. Last time I raised this, the consensus seemed to be: * if a SKOS concept URI with a #foo is de-referencable to XHTML without redirection, then id="foo" should never be used in the HTML, although about= is ok. * the same URI could de-ref to RDF/XML * not sure what to say about redirections, or #-free URIs for concepts cheers, DanReceived on Friday, 1 May 2009 04:06:24 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 1 May 2009 04:06:24 GMT