- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Sep 2009 10:46:29 -0400
- To: RDFa Developers <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
All current Test Case issues have to do with the SPARQL that is specified for each test case. Specifically, the lack of including the xhtml namespace using xmlns, or the addition of namespaces that are not used in the literal (like rdf, dc, and svg). Here are the test cases with issues: Test #0011: Does not specify xmlns for xhtml namespace in <sup> Test #0092: Erroneously specifies dc and rdf namespaces on <sup>. Test #0094: Erroneously specifies dc and bla namespaces on <sup>. Test #0100: Erroneously specifies dc, rdf, ex, svg namespaces on <strong> and dc, rdf, and ex on the <svg:svg> element. Test #0101: Erroneously specifies dc, rdf, ex, svg namespaces on <strong> and dc, rdf, and ex on the <svg:svg> element. Test #0102: Erroneously specifies dc, rdf, ex, svg namespaces on <strong> and dc, rdf, and ex on the <svg:svg> element. Test #0103: Erroneously specifies dc, rdf, and ex namespaces on <strong> and dc, rdf, and ex on the <svg> element. IIRC, of the SPARQL UNION clauses in each test case, we will end up using the second clause of the UNION and dropping the first clause in the UNION. We also should create test cases to test preservation of xmlns: values that are re-used in a part of the XMLLiteral. This also raises the question if we should preserve namespaces that are used in RDFa markup in attributes in the XMLLiteral. Doing so would violate the c14n spec, AFAICT. Not doing so would lead to invalid RDFa markup in the XMLLiteral. -- manu -- Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny) President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: The Pirate Bay and Building an Equitable Culture http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2009/08/30/equitable-culture/
Received on Thursday, 17 September 2009 14:47:10 UTC