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

Re: ISSUE-76 Triage

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 21:49:47 -0600
Message-ID: <4D6DBE5B.6010200@aptest.com>
To: nathan@webr3.org
CC: RDFa Working Group <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Just a question...

On 1/26/2011 6:56 PM, Nathan wrote:
>
>
>   Appendix B: The RDFa Vocabulary for Term Assignments declares
>   rdfs:ranges on the rdfa:prefix (xsd:NMTOKEN), rdfa:term
>   (xsd:NMTOKEN), rdfa:uri (xsd:anyURI) and rdfa:vocabulary
>   (xsd:anyURI) properties. However, none of the examples in the rest
>   of the spec use datatypes. Should the rdfs:ranges be removed? I
>   think it should be made clear in Section 9 that the values of these
>   properties must be plain literals, if that's the intention.
>
> Given other LC feedback and my own thoughts, I'm tempted to say the 
> range should be changed to literal/string, and the text in section 9 
> should be expanded to introduce the rdfa:prefix/term/uri properties. 
> This could be editorial.

Ivan,  I am not sure if you saw this comment or not.  What do you think?

-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Wednesday, 2 March 2011 03:50:18 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:05:24 UTC