- From: Benjamin Nowack <bnowack@appmosphere.com>
- Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 19:44:29 +0200
- To: "Mark Birbeck" <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>, "'public-rdf-in-xhtml task force'" <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
On 08.06.2006 17:56:53, Mark Birbeck wrote: > >Hi Karl/Dan, > > >> Le 06-06-08 à 22:01, Mark Birbeck a écrit : >> Could you give a document which >> >> 1. uses a subset of possible RDFa features >> 2. is a valid document HTML 4.01 or XHTML 1.0 >> http://validator.w3.org/ >> >> I think that would help to have concrete test cases for everyone. > >Sure. The following page uses a subset of RDFa, and validates as XHTML 1.0 >Strict: > > <http://www.w3.org/> > >Near the bottom of the page you'll see this: > > <a > rel="Copyright" > href="/Consortium/Legal/ipr-notice#Copyright" > shape="rect" > >Copyright</a> > >which is perfectly 'correct' RDFa. Unless this was meant as a joke (e.g. "the subset of RDFa that doesn't encode triples"), what would be the statements an RDFa parser should extract from this? Cheers, Ben -- Benjamin Nowack Kruppstr. 100 45145 Essen, Germany http://www.bnode.org/
Received on Thursday, 8 June 2006 17:44:05 UTC