- From: Manos Batsis <m.batsis@bsnet.gr>
- Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 09:49:46 +0300
- To: "Thomas B. Passin" <tpassin@comcast.net>
- Cc: "RDF Interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
> From: Thomas B. Passin [mailto:tpassin@comcast.net] > [Manos Batsis]> > > > > RDF will not be visible if injected in none visible > element(<head> for > > example). There is no need to invent a tag to include XML > one does not > > want to be displayed; simply use CSS (as XHTML dictates for > presentation > > info) setting the RDF container element's display property to none. > > > > Just give up on non-CSS aware browsers, then? Come on Tom, CSS is already compatible with lots more software than a new tag will probably ever be. Besides, my point (answering to Frank Manola's suggestion) was that, as things are today, we really don't need a new tag; we have a wide variety of options bringing confusion already. Two more points you may have missed in reading my post in a hurry: 1) XHTML wants separation of content and presentation information; it dictates CSS as a medium for rendering directions. 2) You can also put your RDF somewhere in the head section of the document; it will not be displayed by html aware browsers. Also, RDF data like DCMI can easily be transformed to <meta> elements [1], although I personally dislike the idea. For *embedded* RDF metadata I would prefer XHTML m12n in XML Schema [2] (no flames please ;-). The zip at [3] provides a really good and easy to modify schema for related work. IMHO, external metadata provide more benefits; modularization always makes things more tidy and flexible. A <link rel="meta"> element is more than good enough for me right now and does not break validation either. [1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2731.txt [2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml-m12n-schema [3] http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-xhtml-m12n-schema-20011219/xhtml-m12n-schem a.zip Kindest regards, Manos
Received on Thursday, 13 June 2002 02:50:10 UTC