W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-svg@w3.org > October 2008

Re: [1.2T LC] WAI-ARIA use of @role as discussed under 'extensible metadata attributes' (ISSUE-2074)

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Fri, 10 Oct 2008 11:02:56 -0400
Message-ID: <48EF6EA0.6010806@digitalbazaar.com>
To: Doug Schepers <schepers@w3.org>
CC: Al Gilman <Alfred.S.Gilman@IEEE.org>, SVG Working Group <www-svg@w3.org>, WAI Protocols and Formats Working Group <w3c-wai-pf@w3.org>, RDFa Developers <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>

Doug Schepers wrote:
> Al Gilman wrote (on 10/9/08 9:25 PM):
>> aside:  I still don't see how in one breath you can say that use with
>> RDFa requires all @rel/rev values to be CURIEs and in the next breath
>> say you can mix and match RDFa and microformats.
> Well, it's possible that my approach is too loose, though I think it's
> sound.  I'd like to explain it, so if I'm making a faulty call, someone
> can let me know.
> A CURIE can be a prefixed or NON-prefixed value, so it has to allow for bare
> strings to be used.
> A microformat is just a bare string.
> While an RDFa processor may not recognize a microformat value string, it
> would not reject it because of its format... it would just not assign
> meaning to it.
> I don't see where a conflict would necessarily arise unless there were
> overlaps in the strings.

Doug, your thought process seems to be correct - however, the SVG Tiny
LC Draft does not quite reflect this thinking, IMHO. Each time I read
the section on RDFa/Microformats I get a different impression.

# When used with RDFa, the values for the 'rel' and 'rev' attributes
must be a CURIE [RDFA] (i.e., a prefixed string, such as 'cc:license' to
indicate a Creative Commons license), while the values may simply be
from a set of specific keywords for Microformats. These formats may be
used independently, or in combination if the keywords do not clash.

One impression is that SVG Tiny only allows "prefixed strings". The
other is that SVG Tiny supports both "prefix:reference" and "reference"

The latter, supporting the complete CURIE specification, is the
preferred one as far as the RDFa Task Force is concerned. This would
allow both RDFa and Microformats to exist in the same SVG document AND
it wouldn't prevent RDFa parsers from recognizing reserved words (like
those defined for @rel/@rev in XHTML+RDFa or XHTML2). The more I read
the paragraph, the more I'm convinced that it's just a wording issue.

-- manu

Manu Sporny
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Bitmunk 3.0 Website Launches
Received on Friday, 10 October 2008 15:03:45 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:54:20 UTC