- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 16:41:56 -0400
- To: Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org>
- Cc: Masayasu Ishikawa <mimasa@w3.org>, public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
* Joseph Reagle <reagle@w3.org> [2003-06-25 16:26-0400] > > On Wednesday 25 June 2003 03:11, Masayasu Ishikawa wrote: > > One caution on this message is that the HTML WG will NOT define > > generic syntax. That's beyond the scope of the HTML WG charter, too. > > Our scope is restricted to improve the meta element in XHTML 2.0, > > and nothing more. It *could* be used to encode RDF in XHTML 2.0, but > > expressing every possible RDF with this syntax may not be the goal. > > Ok, hopefully the RDF folks are paying attention. <smile/> <sound_of_rdf_person_waking_up/> Huh. Hmm. wazzat? Did someone mention RDF? ;) My understanding that we already have a generic metadata syntax, ie. RDF/XML; I'm hoping we'll find a way to allow XHTML 2.0 documents to be enthusiatically deployed with embedded islands of full RDF/XML (eg. in a <meta/> element or elsewhere), rather than have to wait for XHTML 3.0. Is that a reasonable goal? The NRL demos seem to be heading in that direction... Dan
Received on Wednesday, 25 June 2003 16:42:08 UTC