- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 8 Jul 2010 15:43:26 +0200
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Cc: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <6EF89B07-BF39-405A-B466-D54247782FA7@w3.org>
"Confusing" is an understatement:-) On Jul 8, 2010, at 14:56 , Manu Sporny wrote: > On 07/08/2010 07:12 AM, Ivan Herman wrote: >> I would like to understand what this means in practice. >> >> What you seem to describe is that if >> >> 1. I use xmlns:XXX in HTML5+RDFa (which is probably a bad idea anyway:-) >> 2. I have an XML processor that is namespace aware, then this is what I get >> >> But what do we say if an XML processor is _not_ namespace aware? > > The concern isn't with XML Processors, since all the major ones are > Infoset-based and are thus namespace aware. All the ones used by the > browser manufacturers fit this model anyway - they're all Infoset-based > processors. Ok, I understand (I think). But the text you refer to says: [[[ If the XML API is namespace-aware, the tool must [...] when converting the non-XML mode DOM into an Infoset. Given a standard xmlns: definition[...] ]]] So what you say is that all XML API is namespace aware, that we do not have to deal with non-namespace aware API-s. Is that correct? (I used the term XML processor, my mistake, this is probably the same as XML API, right?) > > The concern is with non-XML processors, such as SGML-based processors, > which is the category that HTML5 non-XML mode falls into. Non-XML mode > processors are not namespace aware. > So where SGML-based processors come into the picture exactly? In browsers when parsing HTML5? Apologies for my ignorance... > There is concern in WHAT WG and HTML WG that nobody defined the > algorithm for translating an SGML-based document model into an > Infoset-based document model. > > In other words, in HTML5 (non-XML mode), nobody says how to generate a > namespace tuple... to get from this (in a non-XML HTML5 document): > > xmlns:foo="http://example.org/foo#" > > to this (in the Infoset): > > [http://www.w3.org/2000/xmlns/, foo, http://example.org/foo#] > > Some people in HTML WG and WHAT WG are arguing that non-XML mode models > shouldn't be namespace aware at all because SGML isn't namespace aware. > Namespaces are a DOM2 and Infoset thing. The counter-argument to that is > that RDFa needs the namespace information - we depend on it for xmlns: > to work correctly, and thus don't have the luxury of ignoring namespace > information. > > There is also a parallel issue - we'd like the HTML5 non-XML mode model > and the XHTML5 (XML-mode) model to be equivalent. By having namespaces > in one and not the other, the two models are not equivalent. Since the > two models are, currently, not equivalent - the HTML WG and WHAT WG > folks are saying that the triples generated from a document /could/ > potentially be different between HTML5 and XHTML5 mode. That would be a > bad thing. > > To remedy this, we are trying to create language that makes it clear how > namespace information is extracted from an HTML5 non-XML mode document > as well as an XHTML5 XML-mode document. > > We don't /need/ to modify the coercion to Infoset rules in the HTML5 > spec for this to work. However, modifying the coercion to Infoset rules > is the correct technical solution. > > If HTML WG rejects the coercion to Infoset rule changes, we can always > fall back to defining how one extracts the namespace information from a > HTML5 non-XML mode document (for Infosets and for DOM Level 2). But... is this something that should go into the HTML WG? What I mean is: what will a non-XML SGML parser do with xmlns:foo="bar"? I would expect that it would use an attribute with name "xmlns:foo" with value "bar". So the RDFa specification may very well define a mapping from this to our prefixes and CURIES, completely bypassing the notion of a namespace. That is in case the HTML5 WG does not want to accommodate... On the other hand... we already deprecate, in so many words, the usage of xmlns: for HTML5. So, in RDFa1.1 and SGML and non-XML and stuff we can just say: use @prefix... (I know, this is not 100% kosher, but just puts things in perspective...) Ivan > > I know this is confusing - hopefully I'll be able to do a better job > explaining this on the call today. > > -- manu > > -- > Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny) > President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. > blog: Myth Busting Web Stacks - PHP is Faster Than You Think > http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2010/06/12/myth-busting-php/2/ > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Thursday, 8 July 2010 13:43:47 UTC