- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2007 11:04:21 -0500
- To: "Bruce D'Arcus" <bdarcus@gmail.com>
- CC: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Elias Torres <elias@torrez.us>, Semantic Web <semantic-web@w3.org>, W3C RDFa task force <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, office-metadata <office-metadata@lists.oasis-open.org>
Bruce D'Arcus wrote: > > Anyway, I'm going to try to figure out among our group a suggestion of > how we might put our head's together. I think adopting RDFa as is > would be a non-starter ATM for the reasons Elias and I mentioned. But > my sense is we could look to align the attribute names (are they now > stable on your end??) and you might consider creating a namespaced set > of attributes for inclusion in XML languages that need that (like ODF). The names of RDFa attributes are indeed stable now, and are "namespaced" in that they exist in the XHTML namespace. The DTD and Schema implementations allow for inclusion of those namespaced attributes in any XML grammar. The current document, rdfa-syntax [1], is focused upon XHTML 1.1 + RDFa just because that is the markup language we are defining right now and because describing the RDFa attributes in terms of a markup language is a lot easier for people to grasp. We recently rolled the separate "xhtml-rdfa" module [2] document into "rdfa-syntax" so it would be easier for people to read and comprehend. My take on your request is that a clearly defined module that could be used in any host language would make it easier for your group to look at convergence down the road. Is that a fair characterization? [1] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2007/ED-rdfa-syntax-20070927 [2] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2007/ED-xhtml-rdfa-20070811/ (note - obsolete!) -- Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Monday, 15 October 2007 16:05:01 UTC