- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2011 06:42:07 +0100
- To: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Cc: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>, RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <1D11E130-A7C1-459D-B810-B89B7C288E64@w3.org>
On Feb 15, 2011, at 24:32 , Toby Inkster wrote: > On Mon, 14 Feb 2011 14:39:35 -0600 > Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com> wrote: > >> <p>The XML Namespace document associated with the >> XHTML Family of markup languages uses the >> mechanism for transforming XHTML+RDFa documents into >> RDF as defined by [[GRDDL]]. > > Presumably by "RDF" it means "RDF/XML". After all, XHTML+RDFa is > already RDF. > > Will this still work in RDFa 1.1? Our profile feature in particular > seems like it requires capabilities beyond what most XSLT > implementations can offer. Worse. I am not even sure I understand the goal of the original remark we inherited! Adding an explicit profile (instead of using an implicit one) does not provide any automatism for a GRDDL processor. (Note that the _this_ profile does not include any RDFa specific instructions.) I really wonder whether this remark should not be removed altogether. If we have an RDFa+XHTML document, why would one want to use GRDDL to transform it into RDF/XML in the first place? This is just a superfluous remark for the reader that causes more confusion (eg, harm) than good. I presume it is informative, ie, can be removed without any further ado. Ivan > > -- > Toby A Inkster > <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> > <http://tobyinkster.co.uk> > > ---- 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
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Tuesday, 15 February 2011 05:41:20 UTC