W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > November 2011

Re: how dirty can the HTML be, and still be RDFa?

From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 14:56:42 +0100
Cc: <danbri@danbri.org>, "public-xg-webid@w3.org" <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1CDD450D-76B4-49E7-B2DA-3C6166388BE7@bblfish.net>
To: Peter Williams <home_pw@msn.com>

On 25 Nov 2011, at 14:48, Henry Story wrote:

> 
> On 25 Nov 2011, at 14:38, Peter Williams wrote:
> 
>> 
>> Thanks. 
>>  
>> my question is really simple: is http://yorkporc.blogspot.com/2011/11/bob.html#me a valid webid profile? 
> 
> It seems ok to me.
> 
> It passes http://www.w3.org/2007/08/pyRdfa/
> 
> which returns the following n3 when I enter your webid above
> 
> <pw.n3>
> 
> Can I add that URL to the team members list? :-)

Just 3 remarks. 

  1. You are saying that alternative representations of you are on profile.ttl  - that's ok, but you may want to distinguish between you and the .html document.
  2. you are claiming that you know <https://example.edu/p/Alois#MSc> 
  3. You are saying your name is Bob, but I thought it was Peter.
  4. You say that you have a stylesheet, I think you meant the document had one.

So those should be easy to fix.

<http://yorkporc.blogspot.com/2011/11/bob.html#me> a foaf:Person ;
     xhv:alternate
         <http://yorkporc.blogspot.com/2011/11/profile.ttl>,
         <http://yorkporc.blogspot.com/feeds/7592471264144296115/comments/default>,
         <http://yorkporc.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default>,
         <http://yorkporc.blogspot.com/feeds/posts/default?alt=rss> ;
     xhv:bookmark <http://yorkporc.blogspot.com/2011/11/bob.html> ;
     xhv:icon <http://yorkporc.blogspot.com/favicon.ico> ;
     xhv:stylesheet <http://www.blogger.com/dyn-css/authorization.css?targetBlogID=3667369288247730806&zx=2172df96-702f-4d82-8b33-011829f17812>, <http://www.blogger.com/static/v1/widgets/1756804974-widget_css_2_bundle.css> ;
     cert:key
         [ a cert:RSAPublicKey ;
             cert:exponent "65537"^^xsd:int ;
             cert:modulus "cb24ed85d64d794b69c701c186acc059501e856000f661c93204d8380e07191c5c8b368d2ac32a428acb970398664368dc2a867320220f755e99ca2eecdae62e8d15fb58e1b76ae59cb7ace8838394d59e7250b449176e51a494951a1c366c6217d8768d682dde78dd4d55e613f8839cf275d4c8403743e7862601f3c49a6366e12bb8f498262c3c77de19bce40b32f89ae62c3780f5b6275be337e2b3153ae2ba72a9975ae71ab724649497066b660fcf774b7543d980952d2e8586200eda4158b014e75465d91ecf93efc7ac170c11fc7246fc6ded79c37780000ac4e079f671fd4f207ad770809e0e2d7b0ef5493befe73544d8e1be3dddb52455c61391a1"^^xsd:hexBinary
         ] ;
     foaf:knows <https://example.edu/p/Alois#MSc> ;
     foaf:name "Bob"@en . 






> 
>>  
>> I though the WHOLE point of our adoption RDFa was that a fragment of suitably marked up div (cut and pasted, per a previous poster) could be inserted in any old (dirty) XHTML, tagged with the correct doctype? It was rather ambiguous whether the doctype was even really required, though.
>>  
>> This property was supposed to differentiate it from the previous approaches, produced by machines in some serialization format produced in an endpoint - little different to any other for the last 30 years.
>>  
>> if it is, following up the usual insults from our W3C chair, ill make a blog post with my own certs/keys - rather than use the values from the spec. 
>>  
>> (I just used the spec values so there was nothing to object to ...in raw conformance terms ... while I found a publishing platform that works and could be tested against the test suite and the 14 other implementations, as they adopt the new spec over the next month)
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>>  
>> > Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 13:49:06 +0100
>> > From: danbri@danbri.org
>> > To: home_pw@msn.com
>> > CC: public-xg-webid@w3.org
>> > Subject: Re: how dirty can the HTML be, and still be RDFa?
>> > 
>> > [snip]
>> > 
>> > Re dirty HTML, this is a very real issue. HTML documents are usually
>> > pretty crappy, standards-wise.
>> > 
>> > I'd suggest looking into HTML5's approach. They have a much more
>> > liberal parsing regime than XML (this was one of the major drivers for
>> > the original WHATWG/XHTML fork).
>> > 
>> > So http://www.w3.org/TR/html5/parsing.html#parsing and nearby define
>> > ways of turning ugly worldy documents into a parsed structure. There's
>> > a parser at http://code.google.com/p/html5lib/ or
>> > http://about.validator.nu/htmlparser/
>> > 
>> > See also http://ejohn.org/blog/html-5-parsing/
>> > 
>> > cheers,
>> > 
>> > Dan
>> >
> 
> Social Web Architect
> http://bblfish.net/
> 

Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/
Received on Friday, 25 November 2011 13:57:26 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 25 November 2011 13:57:26 GMT