- From: SVG Working Group Issue Tracker <sysbot+tracker@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 14:23:39 +0000 (GMT)
- To: public-svg-wg@w3.org
ISSUE-2099 (RDFa processing): Re-use of RDFa attributes should follow RDF in XHTML processing rules [Last Call: SVG 1.2 Tiny ] http://www.w3.org/Graphics/SVG/WG/track/issues/2099 Raised by: Doug Schepers On product: Last Call: SVG 1.2 Tiny Manu Sporny (RDF in XHTML Task Force) <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2008Oct/0052.html>: [[ Re-use of RDFa attributes should follow RDF in XHTML processing rules --------------------------------------------------------------------- http://www.w3.org/TR/SVGMobile12/metadata.html#MetadataAttributes """ SVG includes several attributes that may be placed on any element, for the use of attribute-based metadata formats. These include the 'class', 'role', 'rel', 'rev', 'about', 'content', 'datatype', 'property', 'resource', and 'typeof' attributes. ***SVG makes no specific requirements about the values for these attributes, other than their particular value data types, such as a string or a space-separated lists of strings.*** Other specifications, such as RDFa [RDFA], Microformats [MF] patterns, or ARIA [ARIA] ontologies, """ The current text leaves far too much room for mis-use and abuse of the RDFa attributes. It would be a shame if authors were allowed to re-define how a non-RDFa parser may use those attributes in such a way as to directly conflict, or even worse, create ambiguity with regard to the current RDF in XHTML parser rules. The RDFa task force went to great lengths to ensure that the RDFa Syntax Processing[1] rules define clear behavior when RDFa is used in non-XHTML languages. Please add text clearly stating that if one re-uses the RDFa attributes that they follow the same processing rules as outlined in the RDFa Syntax Processing Rules[1]. [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#sec_5.5. ]]
Received on Friday, 10 October 2008 14:24:14 UTC