- From: Shane McCarron <ahby@aptest.com>
- Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2013 20:45:16 -0600
- To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
- Cc: W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <CAOk_reHOv5xDLQvxwsmKdcz6n9CvMaq=FWodhoUCLnAQua2FAg@mail.gmail.com>
On Fri, Jan 4, 2013 at 8:34 PM, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>wrote: > On Jan 4, 2013, at 6:20 PM, "Shane McCarron" <ahby@aptest.com> wrote: > > > >> > In theory a validator could flag the use of @rel on a <link> element, >> but why? @rel is legal everywhere according to RDFa Lite. At least that >> is my reading of the Profile. >> >> Ivan may do something like this in his processor, as I believe he outputs >> warnings when non-RDFa Lite is detected; I don't know what he does in the >> case of @rel for non-RDFa usage, though. >> >> > I guess this is my point. There is no such thing as @rel for non-RDFa > usage. Or rather.... an RDFa processor always interprets @rel. > > sure there is, an RDFa processor will ignore @rel="nofollow", due to the > special rule that removes @rel if it doesn't contain a CURIE: > > [[[ > > - In Section 7.5: Sequence, immediately after processing step 4<http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-core/#PS-new-subject>, > if theproperty attribute and the rel and/or rev attribute exists on > the same element, the non-CURIE and non-URI rel and rev values are > ignored. If, after this, the value of rel and/or rev becomes empty, > then the processor*must* act as if the respective attribute is not > present. > > ]]] > Umm... I mean, I know about that rule, but there is no @property in this instance. There is an implicit @about on <head>, and there is a <link rel="stylesheet" href="somepath.css"> - this should generate a triple <> xv:stylesheet http://whatever.domain/somepath.css . Well - stylesheet might not be a good example, since in HTML5 there are only a few reserved terms. I might not be thinking about this completely clearly. -- Shane P. McCarron Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc.
Received on Saturday, 5 January 2013 02:45:43 UTC