Re: RDFa Primer comment

While I agree that it is physically possible... there is no profile, it 
is not valid, it requires the use of XML Namespaces, etc.  It is not 
something that the HTML community would ever have agreed to.  You 
parsers might swallow it, but that doesn't mean it is something we 
should encourage.  This is a W3C effort, and the W3C has not defined 
that behavior.

Jeremy Carroll wrote:
>
>
> On 16 Jul 2008, at 06:21, Shane McCarron wrote:
>
>>
>> This is a global comment - if you need more specifics I can do that 
>> but I hope this will be good enough.  The Primer talks about HTML.  
>> That's very very bad.  We don't define anything for HTML.  Anywhere.  
>> Misleading people into thinking they can annotate their HTML 4 
>> documents with RDFa is not good for 2 reasons.
>
>
> They can; it is not misleading.
>
> (I am not trying to grind an axe here ... merely reporting that, for 
> example, both Jena's support and TopQuadrant's support for RDFa starts 
> off by applying tidy to the input which means that HTML 4 docs get 
> converted into XHTML and everything works at a practical level - it 
> might not be chapter and verse conformant, but it is practically useful)
>
> Jeremy
>
>
>

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

Received on Wednesday, 16 July 2008 13:56:41 UTC