- From: Jonathan A Rees <rees@mumble.net>
- Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 16:53:46 -0500
- To: public-rdfa@w3.org
- Cc: "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>
In the following document RDFa Core 1.1 - Second Edition http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-rdfa-core-20130822/ there is a false claim. In appendix A http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/REC-rdfa-core-20130822/#s_datatypes it says: 'Markup languages that want to import these definitions can find them in the "datatypes" file for their schema grammar: • DTD xhtml-datatypes.mod • XML Schema xhtml-datatypes.xsd' Now I am not a markup language, but I don't think anyone, not even a markup language, can find, today, a definition for CURIEorIRI in the referenced .xsd file i.e. http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/SCHEMA/xhtml-datatypes-1.xsd . (I did not check the DTD but I suspect it is also involved.) It appears to me to be a deployment omission for this spec. The missing properties are those that were added between 1.0 and 1.1. This should be corrected by W3C staff by editing the .xsd file. I recommend also adding to the .xsd file a reference to the RDFa Core 1.1 in the form of a URI for the spec or the appendix. The URI could go in an xs:documentation element or in a comment (per your judgment) but I think xs:documentation is probably better since it would then be machine linkable. This kind of problem has happened in the past with at least one other spec, so I also recommend adding a step to the publication process to check that claims made about referenced documents are actually true (at least at the time of publication) and that FYN works for all URIs. Best Jonathan
Received on Wednesday, 11 December 2013 21:54:11 UTC