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

Re: Link relations in RDFa (Was: Re: Guidance on publishing in multiple formats) (ISSUE-108)

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 13:36:03 +0100
Cc: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <6E54E04C-6C24-416B-9A70-8296A27BE286@w3.org>
To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
I had an action in the past (ACTION-100) on the link registry, bound to ISSUE-108. This was the result of a resolution we had on the WG:


where we decided to use the IANA registry as the authoritative list for the link relations. However, I think that the information given by Tantek:


changes the background of the decision and forces us to reopen ISSUE-108.

The fact that the link registry is done via a wiki, ie, becoming way more dynamic than the IANA registry, coupled with the analysis  of Jeni below reinforces my (and her:-) original opinion[1], ie, that RDFa 1.1 + HTML5 should ignore the link relations.



On Nov 12, 2011, at 21:10 , Gregg Kellogg wrote:

> Obviously for consideration by this group too.
> Gregg Kellogg
> Sent from my iPhone
> Begin forwarded message:
>> From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
>> Date: November 12, 2011 11:59:37 AM PST
>> To: HTML Data Task Force WG <public-html-data-tf@w3.org>
>> Subject: Re: Link relations in RDFa (Was: Re: Guidance on publishing in multiple formats)
>> Hi all,
>> I've written up the issues with link relations in RDFa as I understand them at:
>>  http://www.w3.org/wiki/HTML_Data_Improvements#Link_Relations
>> Please take a look and let me know if I've missed anything.
>> Thanks,
>> Jeni
>> -- 
>> Jeni Tennison
>> http://www.jenitennison.com

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Sunday, 13 November 2011 12:33:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:05:27 UTC