W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > August 2007

Re: question on the RDFa validation service...

From: olivier Thereaux <ot@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 15:15:52 +0900
Message-Id: <073984E3-75F6-456C-ABBF-AC8AD1BF8F13@w3.org>
Cc: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>, W3C RDFa task force <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, www-validator Community <www-validator@w3.org>
To: "Hausenblas, Michael" <michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at>, Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>

Hi all,

On Aug 8, 2007, at 23:41 , Hausenblas, Michael wrote:
> So, to clarify this: It is NOT the RDFa TF that has 'anything'
> to do with this validation service [1]. The QA WG develops and  
> maintains
> it [2]; now it seems they adopted Shanes's DTD [3].
> All credits (and suggestions) should therefore go to 'www- 
> validator@w3.org'
> (I cc'ed them already in this mail).

To be entirely fair, kudos go to Shane and the TF for good  
coordination work, for informing the validator community (not the QA  
WG, BTW, as that working group doesn't exist any more) of that new  
DTD and helping us patch the validator for a couple of issues  
annoying when validating XHTML+RDFa.

Niklas Wrote:
>> xml:base doesn't seem to work either.
> [...]
>> I also miss an "XHTML plus RDFa" entry in the "Document Type" select
>> of "More Options".

Good point. Unfortunately we've just released a couple of versions of  
the validator and there's no clear timeline as to when the next  
release should be, but if the RDFa TF thinks it'd be a good thing, we  
can add it in CVS for now, and in the next release.

>> Btw, should lang be allowed (along with xml:lang)? The validator
>> doesn't support it for XHTML 1.1 (but for e.g. XHTML 1.0 Strict).

As far as I can tell, no:

Received on Thursday, 9 August 2007 06:15:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 14:17:53 UTC