- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2012 14:59:23 -0500
- To: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
- Cc: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Niklas, On Dec 10, 2012, at 14:01 , Niklas Lindström wrote: [snip] > >> FWIW my implementation does not take @content into account right now; it actually overrides one if it is there. But it is easy to change it. >> >>> >>> Also, I think there is another issue in "4. Extensions to the HTML5 >>> Syntax". We do say "If the RDFa property attribute is present on the >>> link element, the rel attribute is not required.", which is good. But >>> I believe we must also add: >>> >>> If the RDFa resource attribute is present on the link element, the >>> href attribute is not required. >>> >>> Otherwise, if you want to use bnode references (or an empty value to >>> resolve to base, which apparently isn't allowed in link/@href [1]), >>> you must also add an unused non-empty @href just to be compliant. >> >> Sorry, it is early morning for me... I do not understand this. > > What I mean is that, in HTML5, using e.g.: > > <link rel="rdfa:ref" resource="_:proto"> > > isn't valid. Link elements have to have an @href. And that @href must > not be empty [1], nor does it support CURIEorIRI. It would be very > cumbersome to have to write the above like: > > <link rel="rdfa:ref" resource="_:proto" href="#ignored"> > > (In fact, at the moment, the HTML5 validator [2] complains about that > too, saying: "Attribute resource not allowed on element link at this > point.") > > Hence, I believe we should add: "If the RDFa resource attribute is > present on the link element, the href attribute is not required." Or > not recommend link for this and favor e.g. empty <a> or <span> > elements. Ah! Ok, I understand, I did not remember about the <link> element's extra requirement there. First of all, we should use the <link> element I believe, we should not discourage it. So I agree with you adding that extra requirement. Ivan > > Best regards, > Niklas > > [1]: http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-html5-20110113/semantics.html#the-link-element > [2]: http://html5.validator.nu/ > > >> Ivan >> >> >> >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Niklas >>> >>> [1]: http://developers.whatwg.org/semantics.html#attr-link-href >>> >>> >>> >>>> Ivan >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>> >>>>> Best regards, >>>>> Niklas >>>>> >>>>> [1]: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf11-concepts/#section-html >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 8:39 PM, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> wrote: >>>>>> A new editor's draft for HTML+RDFa 1.1 has been published which >>>>>> incorporates all decisions made by the newly re-chartered RDFa WG to >>>>>> date. As of this moment, there are no plans to add any new features or >>>>>> remove existing features from HTML+RDFa 1.1. This document is probably >>>>>> the one that is going to go to Last Call, so please review it and try to >>>>>> find any issues or problems: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/drafts/2012/ED-rdfa-in-html-20121202/ >>>>>> >>>>>> You can view a diff of the changes here: >>>>>> >>>>>> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/drafts/2012/ED-rdfa-in-html-20121202/diff-20120911.html >>>>>> >>>>>> -- manu >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny) >>>>>> Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. >>>>>> blog: The Problem with RDF and Nuclear Power >>>>>> http://manu.sporny.org/2012/nuclear-rdf/ >>>>> >> >> >> ---- >> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead >> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >> mobile: +31-641044153 >> 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 FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Monday, 10 December 2012 19:59:52 UTC