- From: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
- Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 20:04:08 +0100
- To: W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
Hi Gregg / RDFWA WG, On 9 Sep 2011, at 16:10, Gregg Kellogg wrote: > The group would support a change made by the HTML5 WG to allow the general use of <link> and <meta> within flow content with RDFa attributes. Thanks for sending me this response, but I'm afraid I don't find it acceptable. You say that you support a change to allow <link> and <meta> within flow content when they have RDFa attributes, but I would have thought the suitable place to make that kind of change is the specification that extends HTML5 to include RDFa. That specification is HTML+RDFa 1.1 [1], and responsibility for it rests with the RDF Web Applications Working Group. To make the change, what I'd suggest is that you use wording in HTML+RDFa 1.1 similar to that used within Section 4.1 (Content models) of the current HTML Microdata Editors Draft [2] which states: If the itemprop attribute is present on link or meta, they are flow content and phrasing content. The link and meta elements may be used where phrasing content is expected if the itemprop attribute is present. This kind of wording might fit nicely within Section 4 (Extensions to the HTML5 Syntax) [3] of the current HTML+RDFa 1.1 Editors Draft. Thanks, Jeni [1]: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-in-html/ [2]: http://dev.w3.org/html5/md/Overview.html#content-models [3]: http://dev.w3.org/html5/rdfa/#extensions-to-the-html5-syntax -- Jeni Tennison http://www.jenitennison.com
Received on Saturday, 10 September 2011 19:04:33 UTC