- From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com>
- Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2007 10:48:13 +0100
- To: "Ben Adida" <ben@adida.net>
- Cc: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, "SWD WG" <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
Hi Ben, > Today, we resolved [1] ISSUE 10 regarding the XHTML1.1 namespace not > ending in / or #. > > We will use the following prefix URL: > > http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab# > > for all default values of @rel (next, prev, copyright, etc...) I hope you don't mind if I add a small note to this, so that people can see where Niklas' original suggestion went to. (It might look like it has dropped off the map.) The suggestion that we didn't need to be bound to the XHTML namespace for our URI mappings came from Niklas. He suggested that we add the word 'relations' to the current XHTML namespace, to indicate more clearly that we were dealing with a vocabulary of link types. I think most people thought that it was a good idea, so I took the action to raise the issue on the XHTML 2 call to see if anyone had any objections. That group _also_ thought it was a good idea, but then both Roland and Shane pointed out an important point, which was that whatever we did had to harmonise with @role. (The technical reason is that if RDFa and @role were to use different URI mappings then they wouldn't be able to share any defaulting mechanism that we might devise, such as 'no prefix'.) Also, since the @role taxonomy defines types rather than relationships we felt that making them share the name 'relations' wasn't ideal. Which is how we ended up with 'vocab'. :) Sorry for the long explanation, but I just wanted to clarify that Niklas' idea was essentially sound, but that it had to be tweaked a little to fit with other initiatives, such as @role. Regards, Mark -- Mark Birbeck, formsPlayer mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com | +44 (0) 20 7689 9232 http://www.formsPlayer.com | http://internet-apps.blogspot.com standards. innovation.
Received on Friday, 28 September 2007 09:48:27 UTC