- From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>
- Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2008 14:06:02 +0000
- To: "Ben Adida" <ben@adida.net>
- Cc: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Hi Ben,
I've actually gone -1 on this, because I just wonder if we shouldn't
delete the paragraph altogether. A few people have been confused by
this, and it's a little bit of a relic.
Regards,
Mark
On 04/03/2008, Ben Adida <ben@adida.net> wrote:
>
>
> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/91
>
> Read and respond with +1 or -1 and explanation. This one is a quickie.
>
> We have the following language:
>
> ======
> A. Other XML Languages
>
> "If a language includes @xml:base [XMLBASE], an RDFa parser for that
> host language must process it, and use its value to set [base]."
> ======
>
> The comment is that we shouldn't state a MUST for anything other than
> XHTML1.1+RDFa.
>
> PROPOSED RESOLUTION: change wording to:
>
> "If an XML dialect that supports @xml:base eventually implements RDFa,
> the RDFa parser for that host language will likely process @xml:base and
> use its value to set [base]."
>
>
>
> -Ben
>
>
--
Mark Birbeck
mark.birbeck@x-port.net | +44 (0) 20 7689 9232
http://www.x-port.net | http://internet-apps.blogspot.com
x-port.net Ltd. is registered in England and Wales, number 03730711
The registered office is at:
2nd Floor
Titchfield House
69-85 Tabernacle Street
London
EC2A 4RR
Received on Tuesday, 4 March 2008 14:06:15 UTC