- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2007 16:01:07 +0100
- To: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>
- Cc: W3C RDFa task force <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <4725F5B3.8080107@w3.org>
Sigh. You are absolutely right Mark... Somehow, in my head (sic!) the term 'head' was analogous to the 'head of a document', not the <head> element. It somehow completely skipped my attention. /me stupid. I do not want to restart the discussion... my goal being to have thing closed and finished:-) But my test case is wrong then. Ivan Mark Birbeck wrote: > Hi Ivan, > > We seem to be going over a debate we have already had. [1] > > >> Looking at the (approved) pair of test cases #0049 and #0050 you are >> right if the usage pattern is: >> >> <html> >> <head instanceof="foaf:PersonalProfileDocument"> >> >> (in which case my submitted test case is wrong!) >> >> However, I must admit that _my_ usage pattern has always been >> >> <html instanceof="foaf:PersonalProfileDocument"> >> <head> >> ... > > I don't know what you mean by "has always been"; in the long thread > that we had on this [1], all of my examples use <head>, and I don't > see any other examples that come from anyone else. > > >> which is actually quite correct and the situation >> >> <html instanceof="foaf:PersonalProfileDocument"> >> <head> >> <link rel="foaf:maker"... >> >> would not yield any unexpected triples. > > No, I didn't say it would. :) > > But if, in your example, an author were to place @instanceof onto the > <head> element, that _would_ change the meaning of the "foaf:maker" > statement, unless we inhibit the bnode in some way. The proposal is > obviously that this is best done by having a default value for @about. > > (This is all in the previous thread. [2]) > > >> [snip] >> >> [I've cut out all of the points relating to processing sequence and @instanceof, >> since they can be discussed separately.] > > >> Well, reading through my own lines above, I wonder if >> >> - simplify @instanceof (in particular, change test #0050, no blank node!) >> - put the default on <html> >> >> is not a cleaner approach altogether. > > Whether or not that would be a 'simplification', we can keep for > another thread. :) > > But the main point is that putting @about="" on <html> doesn't solve > the very specific problem that I raised a few weeks ago, and that we > had a long thread of discussion about. > > The discussion begins here [1], and note that all of the examples use > <head>. In particular, see the main motivation for using <head> rather > than <html> [2]. Also, see Ben's comments that as it happens we had > agreed a long time ago on the use of @about="" for <head>, but that he > couldn't find the reference [3]. And finally, see your own reply that > you were happy with the location of the @about being the <head> > element [4, 5]. > > Regards, > > Mark > > [1] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Oct/0000.html> > [2] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Oct/0004.html> > [3] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Oct/0022.html> > [4] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Oct/0026.html> > [5] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Oct/0031.html> > -- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Monday, 29 October 2007 15:01:14 UTC