- From: Shane McCarron <shane@spec-ops.io>
- Date: Wed, 1 Jun 2016 06:41:01 -0500
- To: Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com>
- Cc: Michiel Bijl <michiel@agosto.nl>, spec-prod <spec-prod@w3.org>
Received on Wednesday, 1 June 2016 11:41:58 UTC
Not quite. XHTML+RDFa DEFINES a markup language - xhtml-rfda. This is based upon XHTML 1.0. So we need to publish a version of the specification that uses that markup language. On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 11:54 PM, Marcos Caceres <marcos@marcosc.com> wrote: > On June 1, 2016 at 2:17:56 AM, Michiel Bijl (michiel@agosto.nl) wrote: > > > On 16 May 2016, at 14:55, Shane McCarron wrote: > > > > > > It has an XHTML 1 version. > > > > But it has another version? Would it be feasible to forward the xhtml 1 > version to some > > other version? > > My (terribly limited) understanding is that RDFa is tied to xhtml 1 > instead of xhtml 5, because there is no modern schema that one can > validate xhtml+rdfa against. Otherwise, it would be possible to > publish xhtml5+rdfa documents. > > Shane, is that correct? > -- Shane McCarron Projects Manager, Spec-Ops
Received on Wednesday, 1 June 2016 11:41:58 UTC