W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > April 2001

RE: Authors describing what their URIs mean

From: Joshua Allen <joshuaa@microsoft.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Apr 2001 23:57:54 -0700
Message-ID: <4F4182C71C1FDD4BA0937A7EB7B8B4C1D157F4@red-msg-08.redmond.corp.microsoft.com>
To: "Danny Ayers" <danny@panlanka.net>, "RDF Interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
>I don't think I agree with Seth's argument here - ignoring a spec is a 
>approach, whether or not the majority of browsers will accept it is

Well, when the XHTML validator tells me the page is incorrect because
there is no such attribute as "xmlns:rdf" for the "rdf:RDF" element
type, this tells me that there is something extremely na´ve about that
validator -- not that there is something wrong with my page.  If my page
is perfectly well-formed XML and renders in > 90% of browsers available
today, that seems like it is doing much better than what XHTML1.0 can
claim to do.  This is something I opined about at
Received on Sunday, 15 April 2001 02:58:35 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:07:35 UTC