RE: Near final draft of TAG finding on the Self-Describing Web

Hello Mark,

I can't tell from your comment whether you are seeking further changes in the document in question.

It would appear not, more that you are say that there is a situation that remains unaddressed.

Do I have that right?

Thx

Stuart
--
Hewlett-Packard Limited registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
Registered No: 690597 England

> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org] 
> On Behalf Of Mark Baker
> Sent: 21 January 2009 06:56
> To: noah_mendelsohn@us.ibm.com
> Cc: Larry Masinter; www-tag@w3.org; connolly@w3.org
> Subject: Re: Near final draft of TAG finding on the 
> Self-Describing Web
> 
> 
> Thanks Noah, that addresses my specific concern about application/xml,
> but alas, not the broader implications.  As I believe the two examples
> I offered demonstrated, at least indirectly, one cannot assume that a
> rddl:resource element inside any XML content declares a RDDL resource.
>  Yes, the element exists in the DOM, but the containing language may
> do any number of things to nullify its declaration.  For example, the
> rddl:resource element might be inside the semantic equivalent of an
> html:pre, or an atom:content/@type="text".  Or, also using Atom, a
> feed may contain two or more items, each with its own rddl:resource,
> and an Atom-unaware XML-consuming agent cannot know which of those -
> if any - to use when processing a representation.  I'm sure there are
> several more examples of commonly used language design constructs
> which would similarly break such assumptions.
> 
> As the Authoritative Metadata finding says, external metadata trumps
> internal metadata, and so the media type must first be consulted
> before any meaning can be extracted from an XML document.
> 
> The rest of 4.2.3 concerning the self-descriptive value of giving
> elements and attributes URIs is terrific.
> 
> Mark.
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 21 January 2009 11:21:06 UTC