I agree that this approach is a very sensible accommodation of past practice while pointing people in the right direction. -Sebastian On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Nathan <nathan@webr3.org> wrote: > Hi, > > I'd like to propose that we remove the definition of xmlns:prefix (optional) > from RDFa Core 1.1: > > [[ > xmlns:prefix (optional) > A method of declaring prefix mappings as defined in [XML-NAMES]. Prefix > mappings declared via this attribute are equivalent to those declared using > @prefix. If this attribute and @prefix declare a mapping for the same prefix > on the same element, the mapping from @prefix must take precedence. Document > authors should use @prefix, and should not mix @prefix and this attribute on > the same element. > ]] > > and that we change step 4 of 7.5 (sequence) from: > [[ > Mappings are defined via @prefix. For backward compatibility, some Host > Languages may also permit the definition of mappings via @xmlns. In this > case, the value to be mapped is set by the XML namespace prefix, and the > value to map is the value of the attribute — a URI. Regardless of how the > mapping is declared, the value to be mapped must be converted to lower case, > and the URI is not processed in any way; in particular if it is a relative > path it must not be resolved against the current base. Authors should not > use relative paths as the URI. > ]] > > to: > > [[ > For backward compatibility, processors SHOULD recognize the definition of > mappings via @xmlns. In this case, the value to be mapped is set by the XML > namespace prefix, and the value to map is the value of the attribute — a > URI. Regardless of how the mapping is declared, the value to be mapped must > be converted to lower case, and the URI is not processed in any way; in > particular if it is a relative path it must not be resolved against the > current base. > ]] > > This is in order to further deprecate use of xmlns by authors in RDFa Core, > whilst keeping backwards compatibility by encouraging processors to > recognize prefixes defined via xmlns. > > Hopefully this will further encourage best practise in RDFa 1.1, and address > concerns by the HTML WG that we are still promoting use of xmlns and not > deprecating it - by taking the same approach as them, one set of rules for > authors, another for processors. This is also inline with the Robustness > principle when writing internet standards. > > Best, > > Nathan > >Received on Thursday, 10 February 2011 17:08:32 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:51 UTC