- From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Sep 2009 23:27:47 +0100
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
Hi Manu, > Basically, if the string "RDFa 1.0" exists in the @version attribute > (either surrounded by '+' characters or not), then the document contains > RDFa 1.0 syntax. This allows people to do stuff like: > > version="SVGTiny 1.2+RDFa 1.0" or > version="HTML+RDFa 1.0+CoolLanguageExtension 2.1" > > This is beneficial because we do want RDFa to be easily mixed-in with > future element/attribute-based languages. Ah...a chance to resurrect an old proposal of mine. :) The W3C already has a way to write these kinds of sequences, which is the 'feature string' notion used in the DOM [1]. We could use the same thing, but surface it to the markup, rather than confining it to the DOM API. This is something I've been keen to see happen for a long time, with my XForms hat on. If you're not familiar with them, the DOM feature strings provides a way to list features, with optional version numbers. They are used either as part of a request for an object ('give me an interface that supports DOM Events'), or as part of a report on what objects are supported ('do you support version 2 of DOM Events'). The DOM Level 3 Core gives an example that effectively maps to this [2]: obj.getDOMImplementationList("XML 3.0 Traversal +Events 2.0"); The module name is the one used in each DOM API spec -- 'Event', 'XML', 'Events', 'XForms', 'SVG', etc. -- and if you don't specify a version number, it means that you don't care what version is used. (The '+' means that the interface must be directly accessible, which doesn't concern us.) So the exact same notation could be used in markup to indicate what functionality a platform must support, in order to process the current document. For example: @version="HTML RDFa" means 'this document will work on a DOM that supports any version of HTML, and any version of RDFa'. @version="HTML RDFa 1.1" means 'this document will work on a DOM that supports any version of HTML, but it must support _at least_ version 1.1 of RDFa'. And so on. Regards, Mark [1] <http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-3-Core/core.html#DOMFeatures> [2] <http://www.w3.org/TR/DOM-Level-3-Core/core.html#ID-getDOMImpl> -- Mark Birbeck, webBackplane mark.birbeck@webBackplane.com http://webBackplane.com/mark-birbeck webBackplane is a trading name of Backplane Ltd. (company number 05972288, registered office: 2nd Floor, 69/85 Tabernacle Street, London, EC2A 4RR)
Received on Wednesday, 16 September 2009 22:28:30 UTC