Re: Validator error? Omitting rdf:RDF

On 31 Aug 2005, at 03:23, Martin Duerst wrote:
> There is an option on the validator input form to say that you don't
> have rdf:RDF.

Ah. Thanks. Still, I can't think of a good reason why I should have  
to fiddle with "advanced options" to do a simple validation. The  
validator should be able to figure that out on its own.

Richard



>
> Regards,    Martin.
>
> At 06:18 05/08/31, Richard Cyganiak wrote:
> >
> >Hi,
> >
> >This is probably just me being dense, but I can't figure out why the
> >validator rejects this:
> >
> ><rdf:Description xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf- 
> syntax- ns#">
> >   <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://example.org/Foo"/>
> ></rdf:Description>
> >
> >I expect it to produce this triple:
> >
> >    [] rdf:type <http://example.org/Foo> .
> >
> >But the validator complains:
> >
> >    Error: Your document does not contain any RDF statement.
> >
> >According to [1], the top-level rdf:RDF can be omitted if there's
> >only one element inside. So what's wrong about the document above?
> >
> >Thanks and best regards,
> >Richard
> >
> >[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/#section-Syntax- 
> complete- document
> >
>
>

Received on Wednesday, 31 August 2005 10:58:07 UTC