- From: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2007 22:40:03 +0900
- To: RDFa force <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
- Cc: SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>, www-qa@w3.org
Le 15 févr. 2007 à 19:08, Steven Pemberton a écrit :
> So we could elect to tweak the solution we have now (although one
> of the reasons for using class (microformats uses it) now
> disappears because microformats uses class with unprefixed values)
> or we could reevaluate the solution to see if it was such a good
> idea in the first place.
I would be in favor of class for many reasons.
- to avoid authors to have to duplicate values
- to avoid authors to mix between two type of attributes
- to have parser looking at one place for all values
if parser wants to implement one of them (RDFa, microformats, eRDF)
or all of them at least there will be only place to look for the
value.
- to ease the transition of people who want to go from
microformats to RDFa.
adding a namespace is easier than adding an attribute AND values
--
Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
*** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Thursday, 15 February 2007 13:40:39 UTC