W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > August 2014

Re: Test 0332 Error - XML Variant - Missing xml:lang?

From: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2014 20:50:35 -0400
Message-ID: <CAGR+nnGZwS_=C_tCfs3Z+pUsdjWwKLxRb=--Vy+WYzg6A+-koQ@mail.gmail.com>
To: Alex Miłowski <alex@milowski.com>
Cc: W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Awesome! I'll get that fixed then.


On Sat, Aug 2, 2014 at 7:27 PM, Alex Miłowski <alex@milowski.com> wrote:

> Sorry, didn't see this till now.
>
> For an XML-oriented processor, the lang="en" attribute would just be
> ignored.  Having both would be just fine for my processor.  I can't
> imagine it hurting others because they aren't suppose to recognize
> anything other than the xml:lang attribute.
>
> On Mon, Jul 21, 2014 at 9:20 PM, Stéphane Corlosquet
> <scorlosquet@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 3, 2014 at 6:11 AM, Reece Dunn <msclrhd@googlemail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 3 July 2014 06:19, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Wednesday, July 2, 2014, Alex Miłowski <alex@milowski.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> I don't see any problem with XML has a host language.  There are
> >> >> plenty of XML vocabularies that will benefit from RDFa.  In fact,
> RDFa
> >> >> is being added to DocBook and will be valid DocBook for version 5.1.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > It's not the XML is a bad host language, but that this test isn't
> setup
> >> > to
> >> > run in XML mode. It could be if @lang were changed to &xml:lang, but
> >> > that
> >> > may not be the point if the test. Easiest thing would be to just
> remove
> >> > XML
> >> > from the set if host languages for this particular test in the test
> >> > manifest.
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> Meanwhile, the test seems just incorrect.  The only language
> attribute
> >> >> available that is universally recognized is xml:lang.
> >> >>
> >> >> The simple solution is to correct the input document in the test
> case.
> >> >
> >> > Either way, perhaps the test author can chime in with specifically
> what
> >> > the
> >> > purpose of the test is.
> >>
> >> I did not write that particular test (scor did), but it is related to
> >> tests I did write (0330 and 0331). The original discussion was at
> >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2013Apr/0012.html.
> >>
> >> These were created for the web page
> >> http://reecedunn.co.uk/espeak-for-android (HTML5 page) for which the
> >> rdf/rdfa ruby module incorrectly extracted the:
> >>
> >> <li content='af' datatype='dct:RFC5646'
> >> property='s:countriesSupported'>Afrikaans</li>
> >>
> >> metadata as the page had <html lang="en"> declared at the top (i.e. it
> >> used the lang property, not the datatype property as other tools did).
> >>
> >> I am happy for:
> >>
> >> 1.  these tests to be restricted to the HTML (and possibly the XHTML
> >> tests);
> >> 2.  a new set of tests based on 0330-0332 using xml:lang instead.
> >
> >
> > Would having the polyglot notation with both lang="en" and xml:lang="en"
> > solve the problems here? or would lang="en" still make XML unhappy?
> >
> >>
> >>
> >> NOTE: The 0332 test references 7.5 step 11 in the specification.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> - Reece
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Steph.
>
>
>
> --
> --Alex Milowski
> "The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the
> inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language
> considered."
>
> Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
>
>


-- 
Steph.
Received on Sunday, 3 August 2014 00:51:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:05:35 UTC