- From: Sebastian Heath <sebastian.heath@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2012 18:16:49 -0500
- To: RDFa Working Group <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
It looks like there is a lot of overlap between the new ISSUE 147 and the closed ISSUE 123 "Should RDFa Core 1.1 introduce the concept of an HTMLLiteral?" [1]. In the presentation of the "Official Response" [2], Manu wrote: "The Working Group decided to leave the issue open and determine if something needed to be done for the HTML5+RDFa specifications, since that is where HTMLLiterals would make the most amount of sense. That is, we ensured that HTMLLiterals are not prohibited by any RDFa Core 1.1, and RDFa Lite 1.1 specification language. If the RDF WG creates an HTMLLiteral datatype, the Working Group will revisit the issue at that point." Following up on suggestions already in this thread and slight modifying the above, I suggest that the RDFa WG do adopt an existing HTMLLiteral (if an appropriate rdf:Property exists) and furthermore that it be the default datatype of triples generated for content that contains elements. This is for the RDFa 1.1. in HTML specification. -Sebastian [1] https://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/123 [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2012Jan/0088.html
Received on Friday, 28 December 2012 23:17:18 UTC