W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > March 2008

RE: super easy issues: ISSUE-93, ISSUE-94, ISSUE-95, ISSUE-96

From: Hausenblas, Michael <michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at>
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 08:30:42 +0100
Message-ID: <768DACDC356ED04EA1F1130F97D298520157C034@RZJC2EX.jr1.local>
To: "Ben Adida" <ben@adida.net>
Cc: "RDFa" <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>


+1 for all proposed solutions as listed below.

Cheers,
	Michael

>==============
>http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/93
>
>In Section 5.5, processing rule 4, it says "If no URI is provided by a
>resource attribute, then..."
>
>This is a little confusing, since we of course have an attribute named
>"resource".  What is meant is "If no new subject URI is obtained via
>these rules, then..."  I hope, anyway.
>==============
>
>
>==============
>http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/94
>
>In section 5.5 Sequence, processing rule 13 (really rule 12) it says "a
>value of 'true' should be returned from this level of processing.
>Otherwise a value of false should be returned."
>
>Two things:
>
>1) change false to 'false' or change 'true' to true.
>2) change should to MUST.  This section is normative, and that is a
>conformance requirement.  The use of "should" is polite, but 
>not what is
>intended I think.
>==============
>
>
>==============
>http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/95
>
>Section 5.4 paragraph 3 reads:
>"For example, the full URI for Albert Einstein on DPPedia is:"
>
>It should of course be
>"For example, the full URI for Albert Einstein on DBPedia is:"
>==============
>
>
>==============
>http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/track/issues/96
>
>Section 5.4.3 reads (in part):
>
>There are a number of ways that attributes will make use of CURIEs, and
>they need to be dealt with differently. These are:
>
>    1. An attribute may be CURIE-only, disallowing other types 
>of values.
>       In this case any value that is not a 'curie' according to the
>       definition in the section CURIE Syntax Definition
>       <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_curies> should not affect
>       processing in any way; this means that not only will there be no
>       error reporting, but also the RDFa processor should act 
>as if the
>       value simply did not exist.
>    2. An attribute may allow CURIEs, as well as a full URI. 
>In this case
>       any value that is not surrounded by square brackets, as 
>defined by
>       'safe_curie' in the section CURIE Syntax Definition
>       <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_curies>, will be 
>processed as
>       if it was a URI. If the value /is/ surrounded by square 
>brackets,
>       then the inner content must conform to the 'curie' 
>definiton, and
>       as before, if it does not then the value should have no 
>effect on
>       processing.
>
>Since this is normative content, the shoulds in need to be "MUST".
>Second, "no effect on processing" is a little ambiguous for my tastes.
>I would prefer "be ignored".  So, these clauses could read:
>
>There are a number of ways that attributes will make use of CURIEs, and
>they need to be dealt with differently. These are:
>
>    1. An attribute may be CURIE-only, disallowing other types 
>of values.
>       In this case any value that is not a 'curie' according to the
>       definition in the section CURIE Syntax Definition
>       <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_curies> MUST be 
>ignored; this
>       means that not only will there be no error reporting, 
>but also the
>       RDFa processor MUST act as if the value simply did not exist.
>    2. An attribute may allow CURIEs, as well as a full URI. 
>In this case
>       any value that is not surrounded by square brackets, as 
>defined by
>       'safe_curie' in the section CURIE Syntax Definition
>       <http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_curies>, will be 
>processed as
>       if it was a URI. If the value /is/ surrounded by square 
>brackets,
>       then the inner content must conform to the 'curie' 
>definiton, and
>       as before, if it does not then the value MUST be ignored.
>==============
>
>-Ben
>
>
Received on Thursday, 6 March 2008 07:32:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:01:55 UTC