W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xhtml2@w3.org > February 2009

Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 10:18:30 -0500
Message-ID: <49A80446.1090005@digitalbazaar.com>
To: "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>
CC: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, RDFa mailing list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, public-xhtml2@w3.org
Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> Mark Nottingham wrote:
>> My preference would be an
>> erratum to RDFa removing this syntax, replacing them with a self-
>> contained identifier (i.e. a URI). Thoughts?
> More generally, I think it would make sense to issue an erratum that
> replaces all CURIEs in RDFa with the corresponding full URIs

Also, to clarify for those that are interested, we've been having this
same discussion over the past several weeks(years) on the RDFa TF
mailing list. Please read the thread before responding to this one, as
it covers a great deal of the issues raised by Henri and Mark Nottingham
in the current thread:


Going with the full-URI approach, aside from raising a slew of
objections from the various communities involved, would also undo all of
the benefits of CURIEs:


The draw-backs of CURIEs have been noted here:


We're currently working on an alternative prefixing proposal for
languages/APIs that cannot provide "xmlns:" (for whatever reason):


Please be aware of these initiatives before responding in order to
contribute to a more productive discussion.

-- manu

Manu Sporny
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Scaling Past 100,000 Concurrent Web Service Requests
Received on Friday, 27 February 2009 15:19:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:30:31 UTC