- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 13:31:40 -0500
- To: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- CC: Philip Taylor <pjt47@cam.ac.uk>, Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>, RDFa Community <public-rdfa@w3.org>, "public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf.w3.org" <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, HTML WG <public-html@w3.org>
Julian Reschke wrote: > > It's clear that if RDFa is to be used with prefix declarations done > with xmlns, then mixing uppercase and lowercase declarations is not > going to work. > > I think restricting prefixes to be lower-case (insert proper Unicode > terminology here) would be acceptable; it's easy to live with, and > avoids introducing yet another prefix declaration mechanism. I would not be opposed to adding text in the RDFa in HTML definition like "prefix names SHOULD be defined in lower-case to help ensure maximum portability among parsers, since it is common for DOM-based parsers to not preserve the case of attribute names." I don't see there being any need to change the definition of XML-based languages like RDFa for XHTML. After all, in XML case is preserved. Or is ot someone's goal that documents be able to be parsed as EITHER XML or HTML? It's not my goal. If I define a document using an HTML family language, I expect it to be parser using an HTML family parser. If I define it using an XHTML family language then I expect it to be parsed using an XML-conforming parser. Such a parser would preserve the case of element and attributes. Right? -- Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Saturday, 23 May 2009 18:32:35 UTC