Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using XMLNS in link/@rel

Karl,

> The same way creative commons could register urn:cc. I understand that
> we loose a bit of the flexibility of namespaces by choosing whatever
> prefix you want, BUT in the deployed markup, I have the feeling
> (survey?), that people are using the same prefix values.

Something like [1]? Some evidence of this method also found in [2]. However,
I'm undecided re this proposal, frankly.

Cheers,
      Michael

[1] http://ebiquity.umbc.edu/resource/html/id/196/Most-common-RDF-namespaces
[2] http://prefix.cc/

-- 
Dr. Michael Hausenblas
DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
National University of Ireland, Lower Dangan,
Galway, Ireland, Europe
Tel. +353 91 495730
http://sw-app.org/about.html
http://webofdata.wordpress.com/


> From: Karl Dubost <karl+w3c@la-grange.net>
> Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 10:50:39 -0500
> To: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
> Cc: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>, Mark
> Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, HTMLWG WG <public-html@w3.org>, RDFa list
> <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, <public-xhtml2@w3.org>, "www-tag@w3.org WG"
> <www-tag@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: @rel syntax in RDFa (relevant to ISSUE-60 discussion), was: Using
> XMLNS in link/@rel
> Resent-From: <www-tag@w3.org>
> Resent-Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2009 15:50:50 +0000
> 
> 
> Le 1 mars 2009 à 09:54, Henri Sivonen a écrit :
>> Now, to put an actual technical proposal in here:
>> 
>> I suggest changing RDFa to use full IRIs instead of CURIEs. Then,
>> suggest making it a conformance requirement for rel in both text/
>> html and application/xhtml+xml that a rel token MUST NOT contain a
>> colon or MUST be an absolute IRI and MUST NOT start with the string
>> "http://www.iana.org/assignments/relation/
>> ". Authors SHOULD NOT mint relation IRIs that differ only in case.
> 
> 
> After discussing with henri this [morning (EST) on IRC][1], a possible
> solution for solving the issue without creating too much hurdles for
> authors and spec would be to use urn.
> 
> urn:dc:title
> 
> is a URI and as henri mentioned, "one could register a URI scheme for
> dc".
> 
> The same way creative commons could register urn:cc. I understand that
> we loose a bit of the flexibility of namespaces by choosing whatever
> prefix you want, BUT in the deployed markup, I have the feeling
> (survey?), that people are using the same prefix values.
> 
> That would avoid also long uris in the rel value which would be
> burdensome for authors, and templates authors.
> 
> 
> [1]: http://krijnhoetmer.nl/irc-logs/html-wg/20090301#l-83
> 
> -- 
> Karl Dubost
> Montréal, QC, Canada
> http://twitter.com/karlpro
> 
>

Received on Sunday, 1 March 2009 16:00:10 UTC