W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > June 2002

Issue faq-html-compliance

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 22:00:57 +0100
To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Message-ID: <10970.1023915657@tatooine.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>
This email closes ACTION 2002-06-07#5

Sean B. Palmer posted the following feedback on the www-rdf-comments
list, announced in
  Input on faq-html-compliance
and a copy archived at:
  RDF in HTML: Approaches

In order to create a way to embed RDF in XHTML, the way that the
MathML folks did it was to create an all new modular MathML+XHTML DTD
but I don't see this as something we should do, since RDF isn't so
directed at user markup.

Sean came to a couple of tentative conclusions on ways to link and
embed; the former using the (x)html <link> element, and the latter
embedding an encoded RDF/XML blob in the <script> element with
a mime type.

The latter seems rather awful and I don't propose we use it, which
unfortunately rules out an embedded RDF/XML in XHTML, with
validation.  Of course, without validation, it works OK as long as
the attribute-form of RDF/XML is used.


We recommend using <link>[1][3] in the <head> of the (x)html which is an
approach that Dublin Core has been using for several years on its web
site and works ok.  In particular we should say to use the <link> type
attribute with the value of "application/rdf+xml".

With respect to link types[2][4], here the value of the rel attribute.
That may be application dependent.  Dublin Core has used and
recommended rel="meta", which is allowed since [2] notes:

  "Authors may wish to define additional link types not described in
  this specification. If they do so, they should use a profile to
  cite the conventions used to define the link types. Please see the
  profile attribute of the HEAD element for more details."

but that is optional since it is a _should_ not a _must_.
I don't think <head profile=".."> would be expected by most

However [4] doesn't mention other allowed types!

I attach an example of using this.


I'm open to suggestions to how much emphasis to use here on
suggesting / requiring / recommending an approach here.


[1] <link> in HTML 4.01

[2] HTML 4.01 link types

[3] XHTML Modularization - 5.19 Link Module

[4] XHTML Modularization - LinkTypes

Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2002 17:00:58 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:24:13 UTC