- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 25 Sep 2007 14:07:00 +0200
- To: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>, Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>
- CC: public-swd-wg@w3.org, RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <46F8F9E4.3000605@w3.org>
Shane, Mark, Steven thanks again:-) As promised yesterday, I have some more comments (beyond the one I sent yesterday[1]). None are serious and are more for clarity and editorial issues (in contrast to [1] which, if I am right in what I am writing, should be settled...) For the record: Mark was absolutely right yesterday[2] in saying that my comments in [3] should have been directly at the document itself. As I said, I should have gone through all the mails before answering; that is what happens when one has to handle a mail-mountain after vacations:-(. And the current conformance section on the issue (section 4.3) works for me as is. Ie, my comment in [3] is moot. Further issues/comments - Section 2.1: the URI should be in a ling for @href, too, just as for the others - Last example in section 2: @about is a URIorCURIE. Doesn't it mean that the value should be about="[urn:ISBN:0091808189]"? (Two times) - Section 4, Conformance. I am not sure where we are these days with the HTML profile for RDFa. I guess it is still an open issue (is it recorded as such?) whether a profile is required or whether it is allowed but not required (I guess the latter). Either we should have something in the text or we should flag it with the greenish background in the current document to say that this is still to be finalized at some point. But, as Ralph has now secured a profile URI, we should begin to say something about it...:-) - Section 4, Conformance, I am not sure what exactly "whitespace according to the rules of [CSS2]." means, but that may be my ignorance. The only thing I found is[4], ie, the white-space property in CSS, but that has three alternatives. Do we mean that it should behave like the 'normal' value for that CSS property? Or 'nowrap'? (I would think the latter...) (I see the remark of copying the relevant text into the processing rules and I agree that would be better. But, in the meantime, I would welcome guidance to update my implementation:-) - Section 6. This section is set to be normative. I just raise the alternative to refer to it as informative to reinforce that, in case of 'dispute', the processing rules have a priority... - There seems to be a unicode encoding problem in the example of an empty datatype and Albert Einstein - 9.2.4, there is a question in the text on what the default value is for instanceof. The current processing rule says for instanceof [[[ if present, the attribute must contain one or more [curie]s, ]]] which indeed leads to this question (and I do not have any obvious answer). At some point I raised the alternative to allow for instanceof="" (which can be its default value), which would have the advantage of triggering the various relevant mechanisms in the processing rules without leading to explicit type triplets. If we go that way, then the the line should be changed to: [[[ if present, the attribute may contain one or more [curie]s, ]]] - Appendix A. I am a little bit uncertain whether we want to add this section in this document. If we do, we may also refer to XHTML1.0 possibility as a host language (ie, allowing @lang and not only @xml:lang), which may be more relevant in the coming period... I am not sure, to be honest. That is all for now... Thanks again. As soon as I understand what the literal canonicalization is and we also have a final version of @instanceof, I will update my distiller to the best of my abilities... Ivan [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Sep/0202.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Sep/0201.html [3] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Sep/0199.html [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-CSS2/text.html#propdef-white-space Shane McCarron wrote: > > As Ben indicated earlier, the RDFa in XHTML: Syntax document is ready > for review. Please read this in preparation for the face-to-face. > > http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2007/ED-rdfa-syntax-20070921/ > > We look forward to your feedback on this document as well. > -- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Tuesday, 25 September 2007 12:06:54 UTC