W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > April 2014

Re: FW: REV attribute on A and LINK elements

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Fri, 18 Apr 2014 08:06:30 -0500
Message-ID: <CAOk_reGPesfgkYBhKJwAA2o3Eu_xS3EEZq7EJ7oG2jCkPq_8PQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org>
Cc: Mark Rogers <mark.rogers@powermapper.com>, "www-validator@w3.org" <www-validator@w3.org>
To answer the basic question, it is conforming.  HTML+RDFa is an approved
extension to HTML5.


On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 7:13 AM, Michael[tm] Smith <mike@w3.org> wrote:

> The validator now accepts full RDFa 1.1 markup in HTML documents.
>
> Mark Rogers <mark.rogers@powermapper.com>, 2014-04-17 08:29 -0500:
>
> > I believe the validator used to flag using the REV attribute on A and
> > LINK elements as obsolete, but no longer does this. The REV attribute is
> > still marked as non-conforming in the HTML5  CR and nightly specs. The
> > language looks the same in all the versions:
> >
> > "11.2 Non-conforming features"
> > "The following attributes are obsolete (though the elements are still
> part of the language), and must not be used by authors:
> > "rev on a elements"
> > "rev on link elements"
> >
> >
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/CR/obsolete.html#non-conforming-features
> >
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/CR-html5-20140204/obsolete.html#non-conforming-features
> >
> http://www.w3.org/html/wg/drafts/html/master/obsolete.html#non-conforming-features
> >
> > Looking into this a bit deeper, I think there might be a mismatch
> between the HTML5 CR and the RFDa recommendation (which says "RDFa supports
> the use of @rel and @rev on any element.")
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-rdfa-core-20130822/#examples
> > http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-rdfa-core-20130822/#A-rev
> >
> > There are also 4 tests in the conformance checker test suite that use
> the REV attribute, with the naming indicating validators should not flag a
> conformance error:
> > html-rdfa/0006-isvalid.html
> > html-rdfa/0007-isvalid.html
> > html-rdfa/0009-isvalid.html
> > html-rdfa/0010-isvalid.html
> >
> > So, what's the correct behaviour - is this conforming or non-conforming?
> >
> > Best Regards
> > Mark
> >
> > Mark Rogers - mark.rogers@powermapper.com<mailto:
> mark.rogers@powermapper.com>
> > PowerMapper Software Ltd - www.powermapper.com<
> http://www.powermapper.com>
> > Registered in Scotland No 362274 Quartermile 2 Edinburgh EH3 9GL
> >
>
> --
> Michael[tm] Smith http://people.w3.org/mike
>
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
>
> iQIcBAEBCgAGBQJTURb/AAoJEIfRdHe8OkuVDCUP/3gCdjPUYVh4gyVLO6wkbo7K
> kh0Gp80YKaHKhBCmLUAk0RFe8zy2XopTHMNSmIbT7HcFOL+s/UxtTN3hFtzsge03
> zlIvuHHLJhwH8fBxqKYhZwgFFk7FpPk6A9EDnFNXZ+VcI7L51x9xOFrlXRmgLwZD
> RT9AD+ehKz+zI3rDVwayjSbNEISpUCShG9EYSNtlKdhbkCvSFVBYFTdgi65lrT3j
> yXvhIP7xhtuS449yr4xw0fu70qSEqGp6D5Qb8ud+wgaehxklCmddoeX0E+eIrZOS
> 8PBmBo8nNpzyAWeDPpTrKDZS42eozh66ILPMtrACwglJ2VBc9eXi1uU8xcHPEo94
> IHRqlmR1bSiMcGPxVH4ys/2hADqik8Bp4b8HnMxX4bi1kuE28Xda0bLJaBm/iaun
> XqWTBu/foWpxVsCQsI7nwrMgwX2exyx3cpDWLW8DNZm3isMYCIie9L2znbfhdK5L
> uauVqbD5V2zGXAN7AQZEw11mFNhfl4+pYAX5Fl4Riufs3vz/01t8E/uQjzLjbQYH
> atrakFJQyWm+NEmw+EVOHI19Kcv6mrMsKx74SY6fRZrgOZd6v92F18Yany5ro2ey
> tQGR43ByIVUAy3FmwihlLLlB+UVvwYytHNEYmvdBc3pOnyacKIuUzVUvf1HtTjKC
> XS5qIzOhDVyNyxUSDMdU
> =psAn
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
Received on Friday, 18 April 2014 13:07:01 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 1 March 2016 14:18:10 UTC