- From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
- Date: Tue, 03 Mar 2009 14:26:39 -0500
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- CC: RDFa Developers <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Manu Sporny wrote: > > - The current RDFa parsing rules don't change for XHTML. In addition, > only @prefix should be used in HTML5/XHTML5. This should make the RDFa > TF happy. There is a big gap between what users consider to be XHTML and what browsers consider to be XHTML. In particular, XHTML 1.0 permits the use of the text/html mime type. Whether it should have done so or not is beside the point, and whether it actually would apply in this situation is not the point either: the fact is that a number of web standards advocates have encouraged this practice, and many follow it today without understanding the implications. The biggest being that no browser treats text/html responses as XML. We live in a view-source/copy-paste world. Prefix will quickly show up in XHTML and xml:cc has already shown up in HTML. Consider the target audience of the following page, and the likelihood that such an audience will understand the distinction and follow it correctly: http://www.w3.org/Submission/2008/SUBM-ccREL-20080501/ Planet produces output via XSLT that is capable of being served as application/xhtml+xml, that being said many people (e.g. planet html5) take such output and serve it with a text/html MIME type. Additionally, the page itself is produced by combining data from multiple input sources. Simply put: having two different syntaxes with zero overlap makes RDFa impractical for me. - Sam Ruby
Received on Tuesday, 3 March 2009 19:27:30 UTC