- From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
- Date: Wed, 09 Feb 2011 18:08:16 +0000
- 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. RDF/XML or XML+RDFa ? > 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 ;) Nathan
Received on Wednesday, 9 February 2011 18:09:21 UTC