W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > June 2007

Re: using DTDs to ground semantics of XML/XHTML documents? [RDFinXHTML-35]

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 20 Jun 2007 12:55:20 -0500
To: Pat Hayes <phayes@ihmc.us>
Cc: www-tag <www-tag@w3.org>, swick <swick@w3.org>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Message-Id: <1182362120.6367.322.camel@pav>

On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 12:33 -0500, Pat Hayes wrote:
> >The Semantic Web Deployment WG, working on RDFa, is
> >considering an issue:
> >
> >How does one "Follow one's nose" from an HTML document to the RDFa spec?
> >http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/28
> >
> >A recent proposal is, in short "through the DTD".
> >http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Jun/0040.html
> 
> Seems to me that this makes sense only if the DTD is not just 
> recommended for +RDFa, but *required* for it.

I asked for confirmation about that...
 "Is the DTD optional? "
 --
http://www.w3.org/2002/02/mid/1182252772.6367.138.camel@pav;list=public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf

>  Otherwise, even a 
> bloodhound won't be able to get back from the document to the spec 
> when the DTD is ignored or has gotten lost. Maybe I'm not following 
> all the subtleties here.
> 
> What's wrong with the namespace way of doing it?

A namespace would work fine for grounding, but
due to usability concerns, recent RDFa designs don't
namespace-qualify the RDFa attributes.

RDFa is a collection of attributes for use
with host languages such as XHTML.
I recently updated the XHTML 1.x namespace
document (http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml ) to note that
the RDFa specs might be one of the places that you have
to look to find the meaning of a document that
bears this namespace name.

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 20 June 2007 17:55:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:52 UTC