W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > September 2008

Re: rel=CURIE in RDFa, but rel=URI in Link:

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 11:36:45 +0300
Message-Id: <E27CB0D0-9C51-4F9F-901F-4CE291F25242@iki.fi>
To: www-tag@w3.org

> If HTML5 later on decides to allow URIs in link/@rel (and I think  
> I've seen several
> proposals that go into that direction), then we have another conflict
> between the RFDa community and the WHATWG crowd.

HTML5, as currently drafted, already allows URIs in link/@rel to the  
same extent @xmlns takes a URI. That is, using a URI as a rel token is  
allowed (if the extension designer registers it on the wiki), but the  
token is compared as a string--not as a URI.

> This one could be easily avoided by requiring a safe CURIE.

Or by dropping CURIEs and using fully spelled out absolute URIs instead.

Doing this would avoid the problems related to relying on the  
namespace mapping scope from a different layer. The TAG has already  
found qnames-in-content problematic but said that "It is simply not  
practical to suggest that this usage should be forbidden on  
architectural grounds." However, not being able to forbid pre-existing  
usage doesn't mean that it is a good idea to introduce new usage  
(CURIEs) with the same problems.
http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/qnameids

-- 
Henri Sivonen
hsivonen@iki.fi
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
Received on Friday, 12 September 2008 08:37:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:06 GMT