- From: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Apr 2011 13:23:35 +0200
- To: www-archive@w3.org
(shared with permission) -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: RDFa and the OpenGraph Protocol Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2011 20:11:14 +0000 From: David Recordon <dr@fb.com> To: James Graham <jgraham@opera.com>, Paul Tarjan <pt@fb.com> Hey James, adding Paul who's worked on OGP as well. We're consciously accepting the og: prefix without the xmlns declaration as we find it to be what the vast majority of implementations around the web are making use of. I don't think we have an issue with recognizing other prefixes if they use the correct namespace declaration, just guessing we haven't taken the time to implement it yet. --David On 4/11/11 12:59 PM, "James Graham" <jgraham@opera.com> wrote: >Hi, I hope you are the right person to contact about this; I found your >email >address on some OpenGraph Protocol slides on developers.facebook.com. > >The subject of the best way to incorporate RDFa inside HTML 5 has been >the >subject of much discussion in the HTML WG at the W3C. As a result, I >examined >the Facebook implementation of OpenGraph protocol and noticed that it >differs >from the RDFa spec in important ways. In particular the linter provided >at [1] >seems to recognize properties with the og: prefix whether or not there is >a >corresponding xmlns declaration. Also, it appears not to recognize >properties >with a different prefix even if they are bound to the correct URI. > >Is it possible for you to confirm whether these deviations from the spec >are >considered bugs in the Facebook implementation that you plan to fix, or >deliberate design decisions? If the latter it would be really helpful if >you >could explain some of the thinking behind these decisions. I of course >fully >understand if it is not possible to share any of this information for >commercial reasons. > >Thanks > >James > >[1] http://developers.facebook.com/tools/lint
Received on Tuesday, 12 April 2011 11:24:04 UTC