- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 20 Oct 2011 17:43:32 +0200
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
- Message-Id: <886763C5-ACF6-4D7B-8654-FCE5B5047C88@w3.org>
I am sorry, I used the wrong address, so I have to resend it again... Sorry for the noise Ivan Begin forwarded message: > From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> > Date: October 20, 2011 17:39:40 GMT+02:00 > To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@yahoo-inc.com> > Cc: W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> > Subject: Questions on the Link Registry for RDFa (ACTION-100) > > Mark, > > as you may know, RDFa 1.1 is in its finishing round (the editors' draft is available at [1]). One of the last issues that the group has to decide is how to interpret, when generating RDF, a statement like > > <a rel="author" href="blabla">....</a> > > ie, what RDF predicates should be generated (if any) for the value of @rel. RDFa 1.0 used the rel relations as defined in the XHTML document, and generated a predicate in the xhtml/vocab namespace, e.g., > > http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#author > > for all @rel values that XHTML1 defined. For RDFa 1.1, the situation is a little bit complicated, because it is unclear what @rel relations the HTML WG will define for HTML5[2]. It will be different, probably, than the old list. > > On our meeting today, the RDFa WG decided that, instead of any of the HTML specs, we should use the IANA link relation list: > > http://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xml > > which seems to be much more complete than what is in the current HTML document[2] anyway. > > However, there are some details that we should clarify, hence this mail. These are: > > 1. What is the authoritative URI to refer to for this list? Is the URI above all right? We must admit we simply got there via google:-) > > 2. Does IANA have any advice/requirement as for the URI-s to be used when materializing those link relations in RDF? As I said, we used the xhtml/vocab namespace before, and we can certainly continue doing that for most, although the describedby relation already has a URI in the Powder namespace. Or, alternatively, do you guys have fixed URI-s that you'd prefer us to use? > > 3. How frequently do you plan to update this list? > > I think that is it for now... > > Thanks for your help an advice > > Ivan > > > > [1] http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-core/Overview-src.html > [2] http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/links.html#linkTypes > > ---- > Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead > Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > mobile: +31-641044153 > PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html > FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf > > > > > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: smime.p7s
Received on Thursday, 20 October 2011 15:42:00 UTC