- From: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
- Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2007 17:21:20 -0700
- To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
I'm beginning to agree with Manu's argument here. I could still be convinced otherwise, but there is a real value to keeping things simple. Mark, I think one of the issues is that we cannot expect (nor should we attempt) to make RDFa the complete solution for parsing all triples in a page. If we leave the option open for rel="next" to generate a triple, but we don't specify that an RDFa parser *must* generate one in this case, then I think we just might be reaching the right balance. That way, we leave open the possibility of adding hGRDDL to process Dublin Core profiles, including a default profile for XHTML which processes non-namespaced items consistently, etc... In other words, this is a way for us to wrap up the spec *now*, keep things simple, and keep our options open for the future. To Manu's comment: > If we narrow the scope of this to be only about RDFa in XHTML, that > would help things greatly. I just wasn't sure that we had narrowed the > scope to that yet... We are *absolutely* talking about RDFa in XHTML1.1. That's our scope, nothing else :) Note one thing that may have slipped through the cracks, but that I need to bring back up as Creative Commons rep: a while ago, in the previous WG, we decided to add "license" as a reserved word for @rel. Whatever we decide to do with this, let's make sure not to forget that one. -Ben
Received on Thursday, 18 October 2007 00:21:16 UTC