- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Mon, 20 Jan 2014 17:35:29 +0000
- To: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
- Cc: Linked JSON <public-linked-json@w3.org>
On 16 January 2014 16:37, Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com> wrote: > Could the following RDFa snippet by updated to be more in line with RDFa > Lite? > http://www.w3.org/TR/json-ld/#rdfa > > Like this: > > <div prefix="foaf: http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"> > <ul> > <li typeof="foaf:Person"> > <a property="foaf:homepage" href="http://example.com/bob/"><span > property="foaf:name">Bob</span></a> > </li> > <li typeof="foaf:Person"> > <a property="foaf:homepage" href="http://example.com/eve/"><span > property="foaf:name">Eve</span></a> > </li> > <li typeof="foaf:Person"> > <a property="foaf:homepage" href="http://example.com/manu/"><span > property="foaf:name">Manu</span></a> > </li> > </ul> > </div> We could add something like this to the FOAF spec next time it gets tweaked. Which could be next week, next year or next decade. Q: why do you use an explicit @prefix if you want to show the simplicity of RDFa Lite? Is there any doubt on the reliability of the Initial Context 'built in prefixes' mechanism? I wasn't planning to use @prefix in the FOAF spec when we add some RDFa examples. Dan
Received on Monday, 20 January 2014 17:35:57 UTC