W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > September 2012

Re: Status of ISSUE-126 and ISSUE-139

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Mon, 03 Sep 2012 10:43:00 -0400
Message-ID: <5044C1F4.4030103@digitalbazaar.com>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
CC: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>, "Michael(tm) Smith" <mike@w3.org>, Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.com>
On 09/03/2012 12:12 AM, Ivan Herman wrote:
> Per issue 126: I agree with your conclusions, ie, xmlns may issue 
> warnings. It is a deprecated and not-advised feature anyway, 
> particularly at odd with HTML5, so this is perfectly justified imho.
>  B.t.w., my implementation does generate such warnings already (when
>  warnings are requested, that is, not by default).

The issue isn't about whether or not to throw warnings... it is about
whether or not an HTML5+RDFa conformance checker may throw /errors/ if
it sees xmlns:.

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Which is better - RDFa Lite or Microdata?
http://manu.sporny.org/2012/mythical-differences/
Received on Monday, 3 September 2012 14:43:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:05:32 UTC