- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Tue, 01 Mar 2011 21:49:47 -0600
- 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