- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Tue, 22 Sep 2009 15:12:21 -0500
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- CC: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, RDFa mailing list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Julian, Comments below: Julian Reschke wrote: > Shane McCarron wrote: >> ... >> Because, Henri, we don't grok the problem. I am slowly beginning to >> understand that this might be due to our talking past one another. >> The W3C has a Recommendation that defines the Syntax of RDFa *input* >> and the extraction of RDF triples from that *input*. It defines this >> as an extension to XHTML. XHTML Modularization provides the >> structure for a host language. The Recommendation is carefully vague >> about how that input is parsed because that is properly the job of >> the host language. >> ... > > It appears that one *real* problem was mentioned; the case where the > HTML source document is invalid, and the HTML parser rearranges > elements, before a DOM-based RDFa extractor would even see it (the > table example). > > This *is* a problem, in particular because prefix mappings that appear > to be in scope looking at the source won't be anymore once the data is > processed by the HTML processor. > > If this can't be resolved somehow (and I have no idea how), the only > resort seems to state that the result for documents like these are > undefined. (*) I think this is resolved explicitly. See Manu's document, section 2 and section 2.1. -- Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Tuesday, 22 September 2009 20:13:18 UTC