- From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Date: Mon, 21 May 2012 17:33:16 +0100
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
On Mon, 21 May 2012 16:59:28 +0200 Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > - Process comment: personally, I would like to see this document end > up as a W3C WG Note. As would I. > 7th of June. This means moving the document to W3C space, ask for a > short name from Thomas and... that is about it... That's rather short notice, but I'm already using ReSpec.js, so it's probably not a lot of work. > 1. The document defines a default vocabulary URI. It is, however, > silent on whether the RDFa Core initial context terms, defined in > http://www.w3.org/2011/rdfa-context/rdfa-1.1 are valid for Atom as > well or not. There is no inheritance of those terms, so it must be > stated explicitly. I would think these should be valid for Atom, too. The RFC 4287 explicitly says that when (for example) rel="alternate" occurs in an Atom feed, it is just a shorthand for rel="http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/alternate". Atom was ahead of RDFa in putting compacted URIs into @rel by several years. :-) RFC 4287 says that this is the case for anything that matches "isegment-nz-nc" as defined by IRI (effectively the same as terms in RDFa). Thus rel="next", rel="previous" and so on are also expanded to URIs in the same namespace. It's my intention that this remains the case under Atom+RDFa 1.1, so the default XHTML+RDFa terms cannot have effect. It's my understanding that @vocab "wins" over the default terms now, however it probably needs to be made clear that (in the case of Atom), the host language's default vocab also "wins". I would however want Atom+RDFa to inherit the namespaces from RDFa Core. > 2. I am not sure I understand the rationale for the rules in the > <link> element. Can you explain? There are basically two restrictions on link[@rel] in Atom+RDFa 1.1. You can't use CURIEs, and you can't use terms in the scope of a default vocabulary except http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/. To put it concisely, it's because in either of those situations, an Atom+RDFa 1.1 processor would expand the CURIE or term to a different URI than a plain Atom 1.0 processor would. For example, rel="foaf:homepage" would be expanded to <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage> by an RDFa processor, but to <foaf:homepage> (it's a valid IRI syntactically, but not a registered scheme) by Atom processors. Similarly, rel="homepage" with vocab="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" would be expanded to <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage> by an RDFa processor, but to <http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/homepage> by Atom processors which would ignore @vocab. There may well be other restrictions that make sense to add: for instance, forbidding @about on <link>. > I should have my Atom implementation updated soon in pyRdfa... Mine still follows the old spec, but I intend to update it tomorrow. -- Toby A Inkster <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Monday, 21 May 2012 16:31:53 UTC