W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > February 2011

Re: PROPOSAL to address RDFa Profiles - ISSUE-73 and ISSUE-78

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 18:08:16 +0000
Message-ID: <4D52D810.1090609@webr3.org>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
CC: W3C RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Manu Sporny wrote:
> This is a proposal to address the RDFa Profiles issues that we currently
> have open - ISSUE-73 and ISSUE-78. There are three parts to this discussion:
> 1. What is an RDFa Profile and what is it used for?
> 2. How are RDFa Profiles managed now and into the future?
> 3. What is the correct message to authors using RDFa Profiles?
> This is partly a re-formulation of Ivan's proposal with a number of
> items added in that have been discussed since then. I try to list
> assertions rather than the reasoning behind those assertions (which are
> captured in a number of e-mails and telecon discussions).
> This proposal is meant to capture a consistent proposal based on the
> current simultaneous discussions that are going on around the RDFa
> Profiles issues. While I'm trying to make sure this captures the current
> state of the discussion, there are probably bits missing, and not
> everyone agrees with these assertions:
> RDF/RDFa Profiles
> -----------------
> 1. There will be one dated RDF profile, which XML+RDFa will use:
>    http://w3.org/2011/profiles/rdf
> 2. There will be one dated (X)HTML+RDFa profile:
>    http://w3.org/2011/profiles/rdfa
> 3. The XML+RDF profile will be a sub-set of the (X)HTML+RDFa profile.


> 4. The XML+RDFa part of the RDFa Core 1.1 specification will
>    reference http://w3.org/2011/profiles/rdf as the default profile.
> 5. The XHTML+RDFa 1.1 and HTML+RDFa 1.1 specifications will reference
>    http://w3.org/2011/profiles/rdfa as the default profile.
> 6. Default profiles are allowed to be cached and hard-coded in
>    implementations.

but SHOULD be kept in sync with the "live" profile(s)?

> RDF/RDFa Profile Management
> ---------------------------
> 1. The profiles are modified on a consistent basis and do not
>    change very often (perhaps once every 1-2 years).
> 2. Prefixes and terms are managed by the Semantic Web Activity Lead,
>    who announces changes on some well-known mailing list prior to
>    each re-publication.
> 3. Prefixes and terms MUST NOT be /removed/ from dated profiles.
> 4. Prefixes and terms MAY be /updated/ if the new meaning of the
>    term or prefix is semantically backwards compatible with the
>    previous term or prefix.
> 5. Vocabulary maintainers are strongly discouraged from re-using
>    the same prefix for a new vocabulary performing the same purpose.
>    For example, if a new non-semantically-backwards-compatible version
>    of 'geo' is released, it SHOULD be named 'geo2' or 'geonext' (in
>    other words, the prefix for the new vocabulary SHOULD NOT be 'geo').

clarification on whether new dated profiles will be released or not, and 
if so what restrictions apply?

> Authoring using RDF/RDFa Profiles
> ---------------------------------
> 1. Authors are strongly encouraged to use @prefix to ensure that
>    prefixes that they believe to be in the default RDFa Profile
>    continue to mean what they want them to mean.
> 2. If authors do not want to use @prefix, they MAY use @profile to
>    specify a default RDFa profile.
> 3. Authors MUST NOT assume the prefixes/terms in the default profile
>    will remain the same over multiple years. If they want to utilize
>    the default RDFa profile, they MUST specify the profile to use via
>    the @profile attribute in their documents.
> 4. If authors do not use @prefix and do not use @profile to point to
>    the default profile, their content MAY change semantic meaning in
>    the future (such as when RDFa 2.0 is released).
> What did I miss?

not much, if anything, good job ;)

Received on Wednesday, 9 February 2011 18:09:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:05:24 UTC