- From: Thomas Steiner <tomac@google.com>
- Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2010 13:01:04 +0200
- To: public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
Hi all, Please find my (for some comments a bit pedantic) review of the latest XHTML+RDFa 1.1 document at http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-xhtml-rdfa-20100803/. I guess as this document is on its final steps towards LAST CALL status, there are no real show-stopping issues to be expected, and I didn't find them neither. I have raised some questions with regards to allowed attributes (see below) or recommended best practices, but me raising them is probably more an issue of me not being into the details enough than the document not being detailed enough. Still I thought I'd raise them. I did not thoroughly check the XML schema and DTD annexes following Manu's remark [1] in his email. Best, Tom [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010Oct/0293.html === Comment 0 Abstract [...] This document is intended for authors who want to create XHTML-Family [CONSIDER WRITING LOWER-CASE "-FAMILY" INSTEAD] documents that embed rich semantic markup. === === Comment 1 Status of This Document [...] Deprecation of the use of @version [CAN YOU GIVE A SHORT REASON HERE ALREADY, EVEN IF IT'S GIVEN LATER?] === === Comment 2 Status of This Document [...] Removed the collection of TERMs from this document - instead deferring the definitions in a default RDFa Profile document [IS THIS DOCUMENT PUBLISHED YET? IF SO, REFERENCE IT. PROBABLY SHOULD BE http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab AS IN COMMENT 7]. === === Comment 3 Status of This Document [...] This document was published by the RDFa Working Group as a Working Draft. This document is intended to become a W3C Recommendation. [REPETITION OF "THIS DOCUMENT", BAD STYLE.] === === Comment 4 1. Introduction XHTML+RDFa 1.1 is an XHTML family [SEE COMMENT 0] markup language. === === Comment 5 2.1 Document Conformance [...] XHTML+RDFa documents should be labeled [CONSIDER WRITING "SERVED" INSTEAD OF "LABELED".] with the Internet Media Type "application/xhtml+xml" as defined in [RFC3236]. === === Comment 6 2.1 Document Conformance [...] A conforming RDFa Processor must not use the value of @version to effect its processing. [WHAT MECHANISM IS RECOMMENDED BY THE WG INSTEAD? THE PREFERRED VERSIONING MECHANISM REMAINS UNCLEAR.] === === Comment 7 3. Additional RDFa Processing Rules [...] The default collection of terms is defined in [MISSING LINK HERE, OR GRAMMATICAL ERROR.] via an RDFa Profile document at http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab. === === Comment 8 3. Additional RDFa Processing Rules [...] The base can be set using the base element as defined in [XHTML-MODULARIZATION11-2e]. [ARE @BASE or @XML:BASE VALID OPTIONS AS WELL (SORRY IF THIS IS A STUPID QUESTION.)?] === === Comment 9 3. Additional RDFa Processing Rules [...] The current language can be set using either the @lang or @xml :lang attributes. [IS THERE A PREFERRED OPTION (I'M AWARE OF THE PRECEDENCE RULES DEFINED LATER ON. JUST ASKING.)?] === === Comment 10 3. Additional RDFa Processing Rules [...] In section 6.5, processing step 6, if no URI is provided by a resource attribute, then first check to see if the element is the head or body element. [DOES THE ORDER MATTER? SHOULD THE BODY ELEMENT BE CHECKED BEFORE THE HEAD ELEMENT?] === === Comment 11 3. Additional RDFa Processing Rules [...] In section 6.5, processing step 7, if no URI is provided, then first check to see if the element is the head or body element. [SEE COMMENT 10] === === Comment 12 5. Metainformation Attributes Module [...] This collection allows elements to be annotated with metadata throughout an XHTML-family [SEE COMMENT 4, 0] document. === -- Thomas Steiner, Research Scientist, Google Inc. http://blog.tomayac.com, http://twitter.com/tomayac
Received on Friday, 29 October 2010 11:01:56 UTC