- From: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>
- Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 11:27:24 -0800
- To: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
- Cc: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, RDFa mailing list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, public-xhtml2@w3.org
On Mar 1, 2009, at 8:36 AM, Ben Adida wrote: > Julian Reschke wrote: >> The transformation *result* is RDF data. It doesn't tell you how to >> interpret parts of the source. > > No, sorry, I believe that's *exactly* what it tells you. When you're > writing HTML with GRDDL (or with eRDF, which has the same indirection > property), you're saying "this is how to interpret my value of @rel." Microformat-defined rel and class values have their usual semantics regardless of whether one links a GRDDL transform converting them to RDF. Regards, Maciej
Received on Sunday, 1 March 2009 19:28:20 UTC