Comments on RDFa in XHTML Syntax draft


I have two comments on the current RDFa in XHTML Syntax draft [1]:

First of all, I think the @cite attribute on blockquote and q elements 
should have the same status as @href (be considered as @resource), so 
that RDFa can pick up on existing cite attribute annotations in 
documents, and to avoid authors having to write the citation URI twice, 
one for RDFa and one for HTML. See the example in section

Second, are you sure that it is a good idea to give @src different 
semantics than @href? I think it would probably be better if they had 
the same semantics in RDFa. The reason for this is that I find the 
difference between overriding @src and @href values (as explained in the 
Primer [2] section 3.6) confusing, and it is not really clear to me why 
they are treated differently. After all, they both reference a resource 
in a very similar manner, only differing in the way the resource is 

The usefulness of treating @src as @about also seems to be rather 
limited, as <img> can not have child content and you can thus specify at 
most three triples; one with a literal object, one with a resource 
object, and one reverse relation of the resource. Or, maybe @href should 
also be treated as @about?

I hope these comments (although a few days late for the comments 
deadline, I understand) will be useful for you to improve the specification.



Ushiko-san! Kimi wa doushite, Ushiko-san nan da!!
Laurens Holst, student, university of Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Website: Backbase employee;

Received on Sunday, 23 March 2008 22:47:38 UTC