Re: RDFa RFE: No Mandated DOCTYPE

Sean B. Palmer wrote:
> "4) There MUST be a DOCTYPE declaration in the document prior to the
> root element."
> - http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-rdfa-syntax-20071018/#docconf
>
> What's the rationale for mandating a DOCTYPE? I'd rather it didn't
> have to appear; and I'd rather, as someone who is having to implement
> an increasing amount of RDF serialisations, there were an easier way
> of being able to tell whether a document is RDFa or not.
>   
This specification defines the markup language XHTML + RDFa.  This 
section (4.1) defines how strictly conforming XHTML + RDFa documents are 
constructed.  Such documents are based upon XHTML Modularization, and 
all documents in XHTML Family Markup Languages are required to have a 
DOCTYPE declaration.  That's the rationale.  It has to do with 
validation, user agent behavior, processing agent discovery, etc.

> I'd like to propose some kind of attribute on the root element (you
> already have to peek as far as //h:head for GRDDL and eRDF, so an
> attribute there might be fine too; you could even leverage @profile),
> but as long as it's easy to parse I don't particularly mind. This
> could also be used as a hook for validation, note.
>   
We do plan on introducing a mechanism via @profile.  I think the topic 
of discovery, in general, is something that merits further discussion.  
However, it is possible to rely upon @profile as an indicator. 

-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com

Received on Friday, 23 November 2007 20:55:20 UTC