Re: Request to publish HTML+RDFa (draft 3) as FPWD

Jonas Sicking wrote:
> It certainly matters. If for example if method 1 or 2 were used then
> no prefix mappings would be found at all in the DOM output from a HTML
> parser. So it really *does* matter how you do prefix mapping. And as
> far as DOM 2 goes, I think 1 or 2 are the intuitive solutions so if
> we're not using those then I *really* think it's important to specify
> so.
It matters with respect to a specific implementation in a specific 
context. Of course.  But the spec can't care about that.  The spec 
doesn't care what environment you are implementing in, or what language 
you are writing that implementation in.  You are absolutely correct that 
in a specific environment, like an HTML5 conforming user agent, I would 
use a different strategy than I would use if I were writing an 
implementation in C that operated on the raw text of a resource I 
retrieved over the Internet.
> As previously stated, I support FPWD publication of the HTML+RDFa
> document, so I hope that no further action is needed on my part.
Thanks very much for your insight and patience.  We will certainly take 
your comments and concerns into account as we update the RDFa in HTML 
draft and produce errata for RDFa Syntax.

Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet:

Received on Tuesday, 22 September 2009 21:31:39 UTC