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

Re: sanity check Re: ISSUE-66

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Thu, 03 Mar 2011 14:08:40 +0000
Message-ID: <4D6FA0E8.4090100@webr3.org>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
CC: RDFa Working Group WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Ivan Herman wrote:
> On Mar 3, 2011, at 13:49 , Nathan wrote:
>>> The permitted use of xmlns="" as one of the prefix declaration mechanisms specifically will cause serious compatibility issues for reasons that have similiarly been elucidated numerous times over the past few years.
>> we're deprecated xmlns for all but bc reasons now - I think the main point is it's mentioned in HTML5+RDFa 50+ times, more than any other term in fact, can we drop that to zero, and express intent to do so to Ian in the response?
>>
> 
> ???? I am not sure about 50 but I looked at the xhtml+rdfa document and all occurrences of @xmlns are in the XML Schema specification or at the xmlns appearing in the <html> element. These are all legal and have nothing to do with RDFa. (Some of these may also disappear from the HTML5 document.) The same holds for rdfa-1.1 core document 

was specifically speaking about http://dev.w3.org/html5/rdfa/ which has 
54 - or is that not covered by this wg at this time or? (I could be 
missing something) - rdfa-core is already absolute minimum, the 
xhtml/xml docs can mention as much as they want imho.

>>> The language as a whole is overly complicated, e.g. with a preponderance of attributes significantly beyond the minimum necessary. Again, this issue has been described in detail in the past.
>> RDF caters for lang, some RDFa Host environments do, we've catered for it minimally in RDFa core such that if encountered, say xml:lang or lang in xhtml, then it can be used, otherwise it is unhandled. That is to say, it's not an RDF Core attribute, and usage is delegated to host languages. Fair summary?
> 
> My feeling is that he does not refer to language as @xml:lang or @lang. It is a general criticism on the fact that we have more attributes that he would like, where 'language' refers to RDFa as a whole.
> 
> I am not really sure how I would answer that. It is way too general as a comment

ahh yes - likewise, it's very general, I'll see if I can draft some kind 
of something for it.
Received on Thursday, 3 March 2011 14:10:48 UTC

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