- From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Date: Thu, 06 Jun 2013 12:50:37 -0400
- To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.com>
- CC: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.com>, Peter Occil <poccil14@gmail.com>, RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
On 06/06/2013 12:48 PM, Gregg Kellogg wrote: >> To mitigate this issue, we can make a minor editorial change to the >> specification that states that authors SHOULD specify the language >> of their document in the document if they want to ensure that all >> RDFa processors will be capable of discovering the correct language >> for the document. > > It seems like this note only serves a transient need, until the > HTML/DOM specs are fixed, and there's really no evidence from the > wild that this is causing any problems, so I don't really see the > need to add such wording. However I will go along with this, if > that's the consensus. The argument for a note is that this is non-obvious, so we should draw attention to it. The timeframe for this being fixed is currently unknown, so it may be that we're waiting another 1-2 years on it, by which time the PER for HTML+RDFa 1.1 could remove the not if it's fixed by then. Remember, we need to do this anyway due to the dependency on rdf:HTML and HTML5's time element. -- manu -- Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny, G+: +Manu Sporny) Founder/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. blog: Meritora - Web payments commercial launch http://blog.meritora.com/launch/
Received on Thursday, 6 June 2013 16:51:07 UTC