Re: [URGENT] 2nd Last Call Issues

On 03/25/2011 01:28 PM, Ivan Herman wrote:
>> PROPOSAL: RDFa Core 1.1 and XHTML+RDFa 1.1 should be modified to 
>> include the empty @about="" on root elements decision and should
>> then proceed into the 2nd Last Call with a publication date
>> targeted at March 31st with a Last Call period of 3 weeks from the
>> publication date.
> 
> -1
> 
> There are two possibilities here, I am not sure which of the two you
>  propose:
> 
> a) you propose to add something on @about="" on the root but no other
> modification; in this case the modification is superfluous. 

I think I mean this one, but I don't understand why you think the
modification is superfluous?

> b) you
> propose to add something on @about and _remove_ the reference to 
> <head> and <body>. In that case we create a backward compatibility 
> issue. 

Definitely not this one. I tried to be very careful to not propose
something that would remove anything from the XHTML+RDFa spec. To be
clear, the XHTML+RDFa spec would assume about="" on the root element
(HTML), on the HEAD element and on the BODY element. The language used
to accomplish that is left as an exercise for Shane.

> Indeed:
> 
> <html rel="q:r" resource="http://manu.com"> <head> <meta 
> property="a:b">aaaa</meta> </head> </html>
> 
> would, under the new rules, produce:
> 
> <base> q:r <http://manu.com> . 
> <http://manu.com> a:b "aaaa".

No, under the rules proposed above, and in XHTML+RDFa it would generate:

<base> q:r <http://manu.com> .
<base> a:b "aaaa".

No backward incompatibility.

> As a consequence, my proposal is _not_ to touch the XHTML+RDFa 
> document. It is ugly, but an unimportant corner case in practice.

Yes, that is what I meant to propose, sorry if that wasn't clear.

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Payment Standards and Competition
http://digitalbazaar.com/2011/02/28/payment-standards/

Received on Friday, 25 March 2011 17:43:29 UTC