On Sep 13, 2010, at 22:29 , Shane McCarron wrote: > Correct. Moreover, if that prefix declaration were made in an external RDFa Profile, and that profile document were not loaded, the processor would not even look at the item to TRY to expand the CURIE. Processing of the tree starting at the element where the @profile attribute was defined would be skipped. > I think that is the important point regarding the original issue. There won't be _different_ triples (if the @profile is not loadable) but _no_ triples. That was the issue of Jeni that led to this resolution Ivan > On 9/13/2010 3:17 PM, Toby Inkster wrote: >> On Fri, 10 Sep 2010 10:21:14 +0100 >> Nathan<nathan@webr3.org> wrote: >> >>> Perhaps that's a question I should ask then, if an (X)HTML+RDFa 1.1 >>> document contains CURIE-s that cannot be resolved, ... >> This is a situation which I don't think can arise. A CURIE-like token >> that doesn't correspond to an existing CURIE prefix is taken to be a >> URI. >> > > -- > Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 > Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 > ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com > > > ---- 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
Received on Tuesday, 14 September 2010 04:30:07 UTC