- From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>
- Date: Wed, 26 May 2010 10:22:21 +0100
- To: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Cc: public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
This all makes perfect sense. :) On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 9:45 AM, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk> wrote: > Currently RDFa Core 1.1 says that when @profile includes multiple > profiles, e.g. > > profile="http://example.com/a http://example.net/b" > > these are processed from left to right. This means that if a particular > term or prefix is defined in both profiles, then the definition in the > latter profile "wins". > > If we were defining RDFa in isolation, this might make perfect sense, > but @profile is an attribute from HTML 4 and is (at least > theoretically, though often not in practise) used by microformats, so > we need to take into account this historical baggage. > > HTML 4 defines @profile as a list but says that only the first URI is > deemed to be significant, the rest being ignored. If we make allow > later profiles to overrule the first profile, then this seems at odds > with HTML 4 - we're saying that later profiles are more significant > than the first. > > XMDP, the profile format used by microformats, extends the definition > of @profile by saying that profiles are listed in descending > significance. This means that when a term is defined in two profiles, > the first profile wins. If we do this the other way around, it may > prove an annoyance for people wishing to publish hybrid > RDFa/microformats documents. > > It seems apt to mention GRDDL if only in passing. In GRDDL it doesn't > matter which order you process profiles in. That's fine. > > Lastly, let's think about human psychology. We tend to employ a > technique called cognitive frontloading - i.e. we get the most important > things out of the way first. That means, if there's a bunch of profiles > I'm going to type into a list, chances are that I'm going to type in the > most important ones first. Given that, it makes sense for us to > allow earlier profiles to override later ones. > > So my proposal is for RDFa Core 1.1 to state that profiles are handled > from right to left. > > As an aside, we may wish to mention somewhere that implementations > should be free to download and parse the profiles in any order, or > in parallel. What's important is that the terms and prefixes defined in > them are added to the lists of terms and prefixes in the correct order. > > -- > Toby A Inkster > <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> > <http://tobyinkster.co.uk> > > >
Received on Wednesday, 26 May 2010 09:22:57 UTC