- From: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 11:54:51 +0100
- To: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Cc: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, RDF Web Applications Working Group WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>, sysbot+tracker@w3.org
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk> wrote: > On Wed, 16 Nov 2011 13:39:24 +0100 > Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > >> 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? > > As I said, I believe it is entirely so that people can do this: > > <body typeof="foaf:Document"> > > without generating a new blank node, and without having to go through > the back-breaking effort of adding about="". I believe so too. I think it also had to do with not being allowed to add any one of @about, @resource or @typeof directly to <html> due to DTD restrictions. But I'm not sure about any argument for the case of not having to use an explicit @about (or @resource). (Perhaps it was originally said that this magic should only work in the root <html>, where I imagine a marginal case for it..) > It's a fairly narrow use case. I very much agree. I would be all for dropping this! If I want to use @typeof in <head> or <body>, I would have to problems adding a @resource along with it (with either the subject or empty to use the implicit or via <base> supplied base). It makes it much clearer! So +1 for Toby's first proposal: 1. Ditch the magic behaviour of the <head> and <body> elements in HTML+RDFa. Preferably in XHTML+RDFa too. (Although we should definitely check for any usage of @typeof alone in head and body in the planned scraping and analysis for RDFa usage.) Best regards, Niklas
Received on Thursday, 17 November 2011 10:55:40 UTC