- From: RDFa Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 14:31:33 +0000
- To: public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
ISSUE-81: Make declarative definition normative, procedural definition informative. Triage of Issue 75 - Part 3 [LC Comment - RDFa Core 1.1] http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/81 Raised by: Steven Pemberton On product: LC Comment - RDFa Core 1.1 Normative Jeni Tennison: Information about how to process RDFa documents is defined in both: * Section 7.5 Sequence * Section 8 RDFa Processing in Detail When I was implementing RDFa 1.0, I found this particularly problematic. I ended up trusting Section 7.5 (or whatever it was then) and ignoring Section 8. What I would like to see is one of these sections becoming non-normative, so that there is a single authoritative place within the spec that defines how to process RDFa. FWIW, I generally prefer a declarative definition to a procedural one, but Section 8 is written more as a sequence of examples than a detailed definition of RDFa processing, so of the two I think that it should be the one made non-normative.
Received on Friday, 21 January 2011 14:31:35 UTC