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

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

From: Peter Williams <home_pw@msn.com>
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 07:00:52 -0800
Message-ID: <SNT143-W365D9267CF044BEEDF2DA892CF0@phx.gbl>
CC: "public-xg-webid@w3.org" <public-xg-webid@w3.org>

 Im not  doing anything of things you say Im doing. Im just an implementor, making things that work, step by step. First, I posted the material from the spec to the blogspot page. Now I know it conforms (thanks for bothering), I can change a text field or two, and stuff my name in. More importantly, Ill stuff in a public key for which I have the private key.  For me this is 3 years of work/waiting, note. For 3 years, I have previous been unable to post a foaf card using consumer grade systems. ftp failed (FTP scheme is verboten). skydrive failed (doesnt implement resource-friendly HTTP). Wordpress failed (strips tags). Paid Google Application Sites failed (strips HTML tags). Opera Proxying failed (didnt proxy https, and did something funky for http that upset validation agent pulls). The blogspot solution seems to meet the criteria I set (for my implementation) - that is a realtor could be expect to procure and then consume such a service, when posting a graph with a key and name in it. That our 500,000 realtors who already have gmail accounts can now setup a blogspot account easily (using their existing credentials, that also act as IDP to real estate sites), is just a bonus. The friction is going away. Its also rather annoyint (to me), as what I did yesterday was what I did on the FIRST day of openid trials, 3+ years ago. Then, someone had me edit the blogspot template to stuff in the meta links, for the openid delegation and IDP URIs. Then, it was nice of blogspot not to strip out the RDFa tags and let me set the doctype and html namespaces (in contrast to google sites (paid), and wordpress (free)). Anyways, Im going out now for a few hours, to play with some more ASP.NET scripting, for the validation agent - now I have a means of publishing a graph that works . to minimize criticism, it will note its similarities with the validation protocol logic used in the webidauth implementation (one of only 4 Ive found). Critiizing me for form will means one is criticising that author too.      From: henry.story@bblfish.net
Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2011 14:56:42 +0100
CC: danbri@danbri.org; public-xg-webid@w3.org
To: home_pw@msn.com
Subject: Re: how dirty can the HTML be, and still be RDFa?




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 "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"^^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 15:01:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 25 November 2011 15:01:24 GMT