- From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
- Date: Sat, 9 Oct 2010 13:43:26 -0400
- To: "nathan@webr3.org" <nathan@webr3.org>
- CC: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, RDFA Working Group <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <D49DD5C2-DFA4-45F8-A261-D5DA903F6BA6@kellogg-assoc.com>
On Oct 9, 2010, at 9:01 AM, Nathan wrote: Ivan Herman wrote: There is also another technical issue that can mud the waters. Imagine a <body> <div profile="myprofile"> <div rel="NEXT" resource="asfasdfa"/> </div> </body> and, say, myprofile defines a term for 'next' with [ a rdfa:CaseSensitiveMapping ; rdfa:term "next" ; rdfa:onUri "blabla" ] It is not absolutely clear in my mind what would be the property generated for @rel. If there was no profile, NEXT==next, it is the relevant XHTML URI for 'next'. But the profile gives another meaning to 'next' but makes it in a case sensitive way. Would NEXT be mapped against the XHTML URI? Probably yes, but I think it is a bit disturbing for users if these things are messed up, don't you think? What triple would be produced for a @rel of 'next' (the link relation), do we have a URI this resolves to? This is defined in XHTML+RDFa as a default vocabulary term, so it has a defined URI (http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#next) and is treated as a term, thus the case-insensitivity issue. Assuming the case-insensitivity rules of rel and rev don't affect CURIEs since they resolve to URIs before comparison? (important to clarify this imo) Note that it's not @rel and @rev (and @property, for that matter) that are case-insensitive, it's only when the value is processed as a term. If it is a CURIE or URI or even involves a default namespace, it is processed with case-sensitivity. This is actually one way around the issue, instead of creating a term, you can change the default vocabulary, then all suffixes from that vocabulary are treated with case sensitivity, but this only works for suffixes in a single vocabulary, however. Precedence rules for processing? If the token doesn't match a registered Link Relation in a case insensitive fashion, then check rdfa:terms in a case-sensitive fashion? This is a complication that speaks against having special rules for some terms, and probably why they were defined to all be case-insensitive. Appears to me like we can't redefine @rel and @rev to be case sensitive, and we can't define that a plain literal is to be compared in a case-insensitive fashion, and that we'd be unwise to let the link relation of 'next' produce anything other than the expected webscale results. How badly do we need rdfa:term? (assuming quite badly with microformat considerations) It really makes authoring easier when using multiple namespaces, as should be the case to avoid the tendency to re-name terms from other vocabularies as I pointed out. TIA, Nathan Gregg
Received on Saturday, 9 October 2010 17:44:23 UTC