Yoshio Fukushige wrote: > Thank you Ivan, Ralph, Harry and Karl for the information. > You are most welcome! > Per Karl[1], RDFa cannot be fully used in a conformant way to the XHTML 1.0 (or 1.1) > but GRDDL will not be used with XHTML 2.0 that comes with full RDFa... > > Hmm, I wonder what people think about this. > First of all: you/we are all shooting at moving targets, which makes it difficult to assess. GRDDL and RDFa are both under development. XHTML2 is in a working draft (not even last call), and there are lots of discussions on how XHTML should evolve, which makes it difficult to judge that, too. > (1) Is there any discussion in the Semantic Web Deployment WG about making the RDFa > syntax conformant to XHTML 1.0 (or 1.1)? > Yes. See the last paragraph of http://www.w3.org/2006/07/swdwg-charter#sec1 the group should really start about now (summer on the Northern Hemisphere is ending...:-), so some more specific answers should be around in 1-2 months. > (2) Is there any discussion in the HTML working group about making XHTML 1.2 (or later) > which allows full RDFa ? The discussions around whether an XHTML1.2 (or something similar) will be developed or not and, if yes, in which form, is ongoing. The paragraph I was referring to refers to that, too. > > (3) Is there any discussion in the HTML working group about drawing back the decision > (i.e. picking up again the profile attribute in XHTML 2.0)? > I do not know, I would suppose yes. > (4) Is there any discussion in the GRDDL working group about changing the GRDDL definition > so as for GRDDL to be used with XHTML 2.0 (without the profile attribute)? > The GRDDL group also considers the issue of using a GRDDL-like mechanism for XML in general. Their charter: http://www.w3.org/2006/07/grddl-charter.html says: "...It binds XML documents, especially XHTML documents, XHTML profiles and XML namespace documents, to transformations...". How that would be defined is still to be discussed and decided, of course... > Well, for now, > I can live with invalid XHTML 1.* documents with full RDFa which can be processed by GRDDL > (with my ears shut) only if there supplied (XSL) transformations, > but I hope we can reach a consensus which resolves the inconsistency. > I hope this helps! Ivan > > [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2006Aug/0150.html -- 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#MeReceived on Thursday, 31 August 2006 10:23:45 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Tuesday, 5 July 2022 08:44:58 UTC