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

"Triage" of ISSUE-69

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 12:03:52 +0100
Message-Id: <AD1EB378-AA9F-4D8E-881C-747A66559487@w3.org>
To: W3C RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Looking at ISSUE-69, it is certainly not an editorial one. If I understand the issue right, the question is whether we should have a default prefix defined for xml and xmlns. Ie, whether we should automatically accept xml:blabla as a CURIE and not generate a URI when used as an attribute value. The same for xmlns:blabla.

For reference, I have quoted what the XML document says about "xml:" in [1]. Indeed we have to say/do something because otherwise we may generate meaningless URI-s

I see the following alternatives:

1. Include a sentence in the RDFa 1.1 Core which disallows the usage of 'xml' and 'xmlns' as valid prefixes, both in their definitions (ie, listed in @prefix) and in using them as a CURIE. Ie, hitting such a CURIE should generate an error.
2. If we agree in having default profiles where default prefixes can be defined (ie, a positive resolution on ISSUE-78) then we can add these:

  xml   -> http://www.w3.org/XML/1998/namespace#
  xmlns -> http://www.w3.org/2000/xmlns/

and leave at that. Note that it would not be required for an RDFa processor to check whether, in xml:XXX, XXX is properly defined; after all, we do not do that for any other vocabulary either.

I in favour of #2, but that relies on a positive resolution of ISSUE-78. Failing that, I do not see what else we could do than #1...


[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2011Jan/0009.html

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 Friday, 21 January 2011 11:04:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:05:23 UTC