Almost missed this. This is a bug report / feature request against HTML
+RDFa on the HTMLWG issue tracker. We might want to consider it as input
to the RDFaWG too.
--
Toby A Inkster
<mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk>
<http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Forwarded message 1
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=11169
Summary: HTML+RDFa - Infer @content from @datetime on time tag
Product: HTML WG
Version: unspecified
Platform: All
OS/Version: All
Status: NEW
Severity: normal
Priority: P2
Component: HTML+RDFa (editor: Manu Sporny)
AssignedTo: msporny@digitalbazaar.com
ReportedBy: waters.boyd@gmail.com
QAContact: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
CC: mike@w3.org, public-html-wg-issue-tracking@w3.org,
public-html@w3.org, msporny@digitalbazaar.com
Consider this markup:
<body prefix="dc: http://purl.org/dc/terms/">
<time datetime="2010-10-29T15:48:11" property="dc:modified" pubdate>October
29th 2010 at 11:48 AM</time>
<time datetime="2010-10-29T15:36:24" property="dc:created">October 29th 2010 at
11:36 AM</time>
</body>
I would like the @content attribute to be inferred from the time's @datetime.
In the spec right now it seems that the @content attribute will get the text
contents of the time tag, in this case "October 29th 2010 at 11:48 AM". Which
is invalid.
Or perhaps the markup is invalid, because the @content is missing.
But it SHOULD be an error to say something like
<time datetime="2010-10-29T15:48:11" property="dc:modified"
content="2007-01-01">
That's valid markup -- it's possible to set @content to any valid W3 date value
-- but what are the semantics?
(I have not participated in semantic web activity in about 7 years, and my
specification-reading skills have blown away. So perhaps the current draft
HTML+RDFa spec already has this. But I don't think so.)
--
Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are on the CC list for the bug.