- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 05 Dec 2006 17:24:27 -0600
- To: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
- Cc: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org, SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
On Tue, 2006-12-05 at 18:04 -0500, Ben Adida wrote: > Dan, > > The answer to follow-your-nose has always been that this would be part > of the HTML standard. Oh. I sometimes get the impression that RDFa is intended not just for HTML but as a mix-in for other XML vocabularies too. If it's the case that every RDFa document is an HTML document, that simplifies things somewhat. Please make that clear in this use case document, or in a nearby requirements wiki topic or something headed for publication on the http://www.w3.org/TR/ page soonish. The nifty SWD summary suggests this October 2005 draft is current http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/2005-rdfa-syntax Its title is: RDF/A Syntax A collection of attributes for layering RDF on XML languages So it's pretty easy to find answers other than "you can always follow your nose from RDFa markup thru the HTML-v-next spec to the RDF spec". > Thus the work on XHTML2, and XHTML1.2, and also > support for the latest HTML tag soup version (ideally.) Yes, this should > be part of the HTML definition. > > I don't know if this applies to GRDDL just as easily, since in RDFa, > it's the same path you follow for all XHTML documents, whereas for GRDDL > it depends on the transform that you specify in the HEAD of the document. GRDDL uses a namespace-qualified attribute on the root element of an XML document as its hook, in the most general case; and in the specific case of DTD-constrained HTML, it uses the head/@profile hook. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Tuesday, 5 December 2006 23:24:41 UTC