WG comments on XHTML+RDFa for LC publishing (ACTION-111)

Here are my comments.


In the Status section:

- "the document was published by the RDFa Working Group": formally, the WG's name is RDFWA. (Note, the same error is also present in the RDFa Core document!)'

4. XHTML+RDFa definiton

The list of metainformation says:

[[[
XHTML+RDFa also uses the Ruby Annotation module as defined in [RUBY]:

Ruby Annotation Module
ruby, rbc, rtc, rb, rt, rp
]]]

Why is Ruby singled out that way? It reads as if Ruby had a special role with RDFa which, afaik, isn't true. I would propose to just list it with the other modules without any special attention.

5.2  XHTML RDFa Initial Context

The curent text says

[[[
This specification defines an RDFa Initial Context. It is available at http://www.w3.org/2011/rdfa-context/xhtml-rdfa-1.1.
]]]

Strictly speaking, this specification does _not_ define an initial context, it just reuses one that is defined in another specification...

E. Acknowledgement

- It should refer to the RDFWA Group
- The list of members should be updated (and synchronized with the other documents!). Eg, Gregg or Niklas are missing.


----
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