Comments on the latest snapshot of the primer (2007-02-27)

Ben, Mark,

I am sorry to be a bit late with these comments, but I was on a trip
last week. I just have few comments on the 2007-02-27 version, and all
of them are really editorial in nature. Here they are.

Ivan


Abstract, first paragraph, first sentence: 'are chock-full': let us try
to avoid colloquialisms that most of the non-English World would not
understand:-) (the same term reappears in the first sentence of section 1)
 
Section 1, second paragraph: clearly, for 'messaging' reasons, I would
prefer not to mention XHTML2 at all. What about saying
 
 "One should be able to use RDFa with different XML dialects, e.g.
XHTML1, SVG, etc, given proper schema additions. In addition, RDFa is
defined so as to be compatible with non-XML HTML."
 
Section 1, third paragraph: you say: "An HTML document marked up with
RDFa constructs is a valid HTML Document." and I think you will be
attacked on that front, won't you? I think you should make it clear that
it is a valid XHTML (or even, XHTML1) document. It is soooo messy with
HTML these days (without the 'X') that you should not open the
floodgates in my view. (I know this is controversial. My only motivation
is to avoid unnecessary turf wars at the moment...)

Section 1, fourth paragraph, plus the bulleted items: you should add the
xsd namespace to the bulleted items, too

Section 2.2, specification of date (I am deliberately very picky
here!!): the even refers to the XTech conference, which takes place in
Paris. In May, it will UTC+2 timezone. Ie, the value for the date-time
should be 20070508T1000+0200, right? :-) [I am sure this example was
written by Ben:-)]. The same value appears many times in the examples,
by the way, so all of them should be changed...

Section 2.3, just a heads-up: I hope that an updated vcard in rdf
document will be published soon (pushing them, pushing them:-). I guess
the references and possibly the code will have to be updated when that
comes.

Section 5.1, second example: shouldn't there be an id="card" on the dl
element? If so, that is repeated below in several examples.

Otherwise, it looks great, just let it published:-)

Ivan

-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
URL: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
PGP Key: http://www.cwi.nl/%7Eivan/AboutMe/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf