- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 13:39:24 +0100
- To: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Cc: RDF Web Applications Working Group WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>, sysbot+tracker@w3.org
On Nov 16, 2011, at 13:31 , Toby Inkster wrote: > On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 09:07:59 +0100 > Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > >> Toby wrote: >>> 1. Ditch the magic behaviour of the <head> and <body> elements in >>> HTML+RDFa. Preferably in XHTML+RDFa too. >> >> What this means is that the processing would begin by not having a >> subject at all. > > No, it wouldn't. From RDFa 1.1 Core: > > | At the beginning of processing, an initial evaluation context is > | created, as follows: > | * the base is set to the URI of the document (or another value > | specified in a language specific manner such as the HTML base > | element); > | * the parent subject is set to the base value; Oops, you are right. But, I must admit, I do not understand this any more. Why do we have this magic <head>/<body> behaviour in the first place? I mean, it was such a long time ago when we introduced it that I simply do not remember the rationale. What this rule says, in terms of elements, is that <html> (or any top element) _has_ this magic behaviour, ie, an @about="" is introduced on that level, conceptually (unless there is an explicit @about, that is). So what does <head> and <body> magic brings us? I am officially lost.:-) > >> IN any case, lots of backward compatibility issues: although I dislike >> them, but all those stylesheet triples would disappear, because they >> are almost always generated through the <head> and its magic >> property. > > Nope, they wouldn't disappear. The initial evalutaion context would set > the subject to be the document's base URI, so stylesheet triples would > pick up that as their subject by default. > >> Toby wrote: >>> 2. Say that the magic behaviour of <head> and <body> only kicks in >>> when the <head> or <body> element carries the @typeof attribute. >>> Preferably in XHTML+RDFa too. >> >> I do not think that works. I may have very legitimate reasons to use >> <body typeof="T"> >> ie, to create a blank node of type 'T'. > > Well, you're out of luck, because that will already fail in XHTML+RDFa > 1.0 and 1.1 - it will set the rdf:type of the document's base URI, not > a blank node. > Oops again:-) Ivan > -- > Toby A Inkster > <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> > <http://tobyinkster.co.uk> ---- 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 Wednesday, 16 November 2011 12:36:51 UTC