- From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 20:18:16 +0000
- To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
- Cc: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
On 16 Nov 2011, at 18:31, Gregg Kellogg wrote: > On Nov 16, 2011, at 7:30 AM, Ivan Herman wrote: >> >> On Nov 16, 2011, at 16:23 , Ivan Herman wrote: >>> - ISSUE-113: Add the value attribute of the HTML data element as a possible literal target for property >>> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/113 >> >> Yes > > +1: This is interesting, as <data @value> is intended to be "machine readable" data, which I interpret to mean having a datatype. It is specifically intended when the machine-readable value is different from a human readable format. This would imply to me that doing a lexical matching over a larger set of XSD datatypes would be appropriate, but it's not called out explicitly. My strong feeling is that you shouldn't sniff datatypes based on the content of the value attribute -- it's too magic. But not giving the value a language would be good. Jeni -- Jeni Tennison http://www.jenitennison.com
Received on Wednesday, 16 November 2011 20:18:58 UTC