- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 14 Dec 2006 00:23:01 -0500
- To: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
- Cc: Fabien Gandon <Fabien.Gandon@sophia.inria.fr>, public-grddl-wg@w3.org
On Dec 14, 2006, at 12:08 AM, Ben Adida wrote: > Dan Connolly wrote: >> >>> <head profile="http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view"> >>> <link rel="transformation" href="RDFa2RDFXML.xsl"/> >>> </head> >> >> The fact that it's a GRDDL transformation doesn't make it any less an >> RDFa statement, >> as far as I can tell. I agree with Brian that it "looks a little bit >> broken"; > > What's broken about this? There's a REL that relates the current > document to RDFa2RDFXML.xsl, which is a "transformation". The RDFa spec seems to turn the relationship into an RDF property named http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtmltransformation which is not a URI that w3.org ever meant for anybody to use. It's 404, in particular. Here's a bit more of Brian's 12 Dec message for context of the "little bit broken" quote: [[ I note also that the property in this statement has a URI of http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtmltransformation and is affected by the default namespace in effect in the head of the source document. I think the test case accurately reflects the spec, but that still looks a bit broken to me. ]] -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 14 December 2006 05:23:09 UTC