Re: RDFa 1.1 and the future of RDFa 1.0

That's great. Thanks Toby and Ivan, it looks you're all on the same page!

Steph.

On Mon, May 3, 2010 at 3:21 PM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:

> Stéphane,
>
> On May 3, 2010, at 15:29 , Stéphane Corlosquet wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > With RDFa 1.1 around the corner, is it safe to ship new applications
> (such as Drupal 7) with RDFa 1.0, or should we migrate to RDFa 1.1? Will
> RDFa parsers still understand RDFa 1.0 in say two years from now? (Note that
> the page templates included in Drupal 7 are all XHTML).
> >
>
> the goal is that RDFa 1.1 would be a superset of RDFa 1.0. Put it another
> way, any valid RDFa 1.0 file should be understood by a RDFa 1.1 engine
> yielding the same triples. That is what the WG charter says.
>
> There might be some corner cases where we are allowed not to follow this
> strict backward compatibility, namely on how exactly we would handle XML
> Literals by default.
>
> > Is there any document listing the difference and/or benefits between RDFa
> 1.0 and RDF 1.1?
> >
>
> I wrote a blog on the major new things:
>
> http://ivan-herman.name/2010/04/22/rdfa-1-1-drafts/
>
> maybe this helps
>
> Ivan
>
> > Steph.
>
>
> ----
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
>