- From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
- Date: Mon, 14 May 2012 15:08:22 -0400
- To: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- CC: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
On May 14, 2012, at 3:56 AM, Toby Inkster wrote: > On Mon, 14 May 2012 12:52:29 +0200 > Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > >> There are significant changes under way in RDFa 1.1 on this. >> Essentially, on the RDF lexical value side, the requirement of C14N >> will be gone, any well formed XML fragment is fine (and the equality >> of RDF Literals will be pushed down to the value space of the >> literal). That's great, but we can't change RDFa 1.0, and I don't believe we'll change RDFa Core 1.1. Most likely, this would go as an additional rule in HTML+RDFa 1.1, and we could exclude the XMLLiteral case. > Yay! > > But my main point is about the test suite for RDFa 1.0, where test case > 0212 contradicts the old 0011 and the RDFa 1.0 spec. What do you think should be produced in this case? The input is: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML+RDFa 1.0//EN" "http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/DTD/xhtml-rdfa-1.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" version="XHTML+RDFa 1.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"> <head> <title>Test 0212</title> </head> <body> <!-- In RDFa 1.0, if a literal contains XML elements, and no explicit datatype is set, the result is XMLLiteral --> <div about="http://www.example.org/"> <h2 property="dc:title">E = mc<sup>2</sup>: The Most Urgent Problem of Our Time</h2> </div> </body> </html> I believe that XML C14N causes the inherited namespaces to be demoted down to the <sup> element. Shouldn't the expected output be the nodeset with the addition of the default and dc namespaces? "E = mc<sup xmlns=\"http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml\" xmlns:dc=\"http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/\">2</sup>: The Most Urgent Problem of Our Time"^^<http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#XMLLiteral> . What do you think should be produced in this case? Gregg > -- > Toby A Inkster > <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> > <http://tobyinkster.co.uk> > >
Received on Monday, 14 May 2012 19:09:03 UTC