W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > September 2009

Re: FPWD Review Request: HTML+RDFa

From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 18:32:33 +0100
Message-ID: <640dd5060909031032x679634fekcd371db6ccd21ccd@mail.gmail.com>
To: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Cc: Anne van Kesteren <annevk@opera.com>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>, RDFa Developers <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Hi Sam,

On Thu, Sep 3, 2009 at 3:53 PM, Sam Ruby<rubys@intertwingly.net> wrote:
>> All that an RDFa parser needs to know is what the mapping is between
>> some token and its full URI, and it really doesn't care whether the
>> mechanism to do this is:
>>  prefix="dc http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
>> or:
>>  prefix="dc=http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
>> or:
>>  prefix-dc="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
>> or:
>>  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
> I'd like to suggest that we review the document[1] as presented.  I see
> section 4.3 describes the fourth option, but I don't see the others being
> proposed at all.

Right...because no-one is proposing the others in this document.

I was trying to explain why RDFa cannot be regarded as being "layered"
on top of XML namespaces, because it doesn't actually require XML

RDFa only requires a prefix mapping mechanism, and this could just as
easily have been @xmlns-dc, @banana:dc, @samruby="dc=..." or something
else entirely.

It just so happens that the W3C already used the xmlns-based attribute
naming mechanism to create tokens, so we went with that.

But that is the beginning and end of RDFa's relationship with XML namespaces.

I don't know what else to do to explain this really simple point.



Mark Birbeck, webBackplane



webBackplane is a trading name of Backplane Ltd. (company number
05972288, registered office: 2nd Floor, 69/85 Tabernacle Street,
London, EC2A 4RR)
Received on Thursday, 3 September 2009 17:33:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:02:04 UTC