- From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>
- Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 14:36:29 +0100
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: benjamin.adrian@dfki.de, RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Hi Ivan, > I certainly prefer this approach to the current one. Same here. I should have suggested this before, since this is actually how my RDFa library is implemented. > I still have a certain unease of having, in effect, a mechanism to completely bypass > (if wanted) our document-store model but I understand the need for that in some cases > (I had a chat with Manu yesterday who was giving me use cases). So it is fine. I think it's fair enough to be concerned. Perhaps one way to come at this would be to have different scenarios or 'profiles' that an implementation can choose to conform to? At least that way we can ensure that all implementations of a certain type expose the same interfaces. (E.g., browser implementations might all adopt 'profile x', which requires a default store, and that parsing has already been completed on document load, etc.) Regards, Mark -- 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 Thursday, 3 June 2010 13:37:06 UTC