Re: RDFa reliance on namespace declaration

Not true, at all Karl.

Much of RDFa will work in both HTML and XHTML. However, if you want to
make statements that have global relevance (i.e., use more of RDF)
then you will need to use namespaces, which of course requires an
XML-based language.

Ian's point is that any XML-based language should not use QNames
within the *content* since the namespace prefixes can be lost or
changed. I've shown that in general this is  either not the case, or
it happens in certain circumstance that a stylesheet author can avoid.

In eRDF Ian proposes using a differerent namespacing mechanism; this
may be desirable for a number of reasons and those can be discussed,
but I've been trying to make clear simply that this new namespaceing
mechanism is not *required* as a consequence of using XSLT. This
mechanism does take the same approach as the W3C RSS example we had
the other day--of creating a predicate that is not a predicate, as a
for parsing and in this case it is one that requires parsing to crack
it open (e.g., "schema.cc").

In addition, it's worth pointing out that Ian's "copy-and-paste" blog
won't actually solve the problem, since we could have an XSLT file
that uses a @rel="schema.xx" statement that contradicts a different
"schema.xx" already in the source document. Of course to resolve that
we'd have to define a scoping mechanism...but we seem to be
reinventing XML namespaces.

Regards,

Mark

On 19/06/06, Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org> wrote:
>
>
> Le 06-06-18 à 20:59, Mark Birbeck a écrit :
> > the XSLT lists; the only reason I feel compelled to keep responding is
> > that the underlying assumption of your points is that we need to drop
> > QName use from XHTML. (RDFa is just one use of QNames in XHTML 2.)
>
> Hmmm :)
> I don't think you disagree that much Ian and Mark, quite the opposite
> but with a different scope. And it's why it's very important to
> specify the version of XHTML/HTML you are using in all cases.
>
> * What Ian is proposing in
>         Towards Copy and Paste eRDF
>         June 13, 2006 @ 6:37 pm
> http://iandavis.com/blog/2006/06/towards-copy-and-paste-erdf
> is a mechanism which makes it usable with HTML 4.01 and XHTML 1.0.
>
> * Mark is proposing a system which is only usable with XHTML 2.0
>
> Each time, you are discussing, it would be better to state clearly
> your scopes.
>
> (PS: I'm not taking position for one or the other solution)
>
>
> --
> Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
> W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
>    QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
>       *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Received on Monday, 19 June 2006 06:26:36 UTC