- From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
- Date: Tue, 9 Apr 2002 11:47:48 +0100
- To: "Patrick Stickler" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>
[...] > > http://www.doctypes.org/meta/NOTE-xhtml-augmeta.html > > [broken link... any alternates?] Argh! The entire doctypes.org has gone down, and Alexa doesn't have a copy of that document. Thankfully the Google cache has it, so I've published it to infomesh.net too:- <http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:www. doctypes.org/meta/NOTE-xhtml-augmeta.html> http://infomesh.net/2002/augmeta/ [...] > Just <include> the RDF XML schema in the XHTML XML > schema and you can achieve full validation. According to:- http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/#section-Schemas the only official schema for RDF is the BNF, and the non-normative XML schema isn't even working yet. Since extensions to XHTML will most likely require both working DTD and XSD modules, validation is not going to be as easy as you appear to think it will be. Embedding NTriples (well, Sandro's version) would be better from a validation standpoint (you'd have to delimit it with <![CDATA[NTriples]]>). In fact, the HTML specification says that it's legal to point to some RDF externally, using either <link> or even <object> in the header. I really don't think that embedding RDF is an architecturally clean solution, for the following reasons:- * Validation is difficult, if not impossible (already mentioned). * RDF is not the center of the universe. If people want to embed Topic Maps, SOAP graphs, or some as yet uninvented language (or perhaps an alternate serialization of one of the above), what are they to do? * Embedding huge amounts of data that legacy clients cannot read will slow down loading - an unecessary problem given that the RDF can be linked to. * As Masayasu has mentioned, "the HTML WG will not recommend to use 'text/html' for this kind of documents". Mixing namespaces and sending it to legacy processors is risky. * XHTML 2.0 should have sufficient metadata mechanisms in it - while I'm not saying that we all have to wait, I'm saying that it's an option. Linking to the RDF will remedy all of the problems mentioned above, so architecturally it is the strongest choice. Augmenting the current metadata mechanisms is also another choice. But please - don't embed. -- Kindest Regards, Sean B. Palmer @prefix : <http://purl.org/net/swn#> . :Sean :homepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .
Received on Tuesday, 9 April 2002 06:48:44 UTC