Re: ISSUE-137 (Media Type): HTML+RDFa should normatively declare media types and describe how to identify relative to XHTML+RDFa 1.1 [RDFa 1.1 in HTML5]


your code seems to require the @version attribute to decide for XHTML+RDFa 1.1. RDFa Core does not _require_ this attribute.


On Apr 26, 2012, at 03:26 , Alex Milowski wrote:

> On Wed, Apr 25, 2012 at 5:48 PM, Gregg Kellogg <> wrote:
>> Basically, if I see text/html, I use HTML+RDFa. If I see application/xhtml+xml, I use XHTML+RDFa if I see "xhtml" in DOCTYPE. Otherwise, I use HTML+RDFa.
> What I just implemented to test this is more based on inspecting the
> DOM.  My chrome extension will automatically run on any HTML flavor of
> document as well as for XML media types.  As such, I'm post
> content-type inspection.  A firefox extension could handle that
> better.
> The same would be true if your just included my Javascript library in
> your web page.
> Afterwards, I check as follows:
> XHTML+RDFa 1.1 iff  (document.documentElement.localName=="html"  and
> document.documentElement.getAttribute("version")=="XHTML+RDFa 1.1")
> HTML+RDFa 1.1 iff (document.documentElement.localName=="html"  ||
> document.documentElement.namespaceURI=="")
> XML otherwise
> That means, in comparison to what you've done, I'm going to process
> more XHTML documents with HTML+RDFa 1.1.  I'm not sure there is a
> right answer here for all processors/user agent combinations.
> It would be nice if there was a consistent answer for a certain class
> of user agents (e.g. browsers).
> -- 
> --Alex Milowski
> "The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the
> inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language
> considered."
> Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
mobile: +31-641044153

Received on Thursday, 26 April 2012 09:20:51 UTC