- From: Michael[tm] Smith <mike@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2012 15:33:49 +0900
- To: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
- Cc: www-validator@w3.org
Hi Stéphane, I landed a change for this and pushed it out to http://validator.w3.org/nu so it should be working as expected now. Please try it and if you find any problems let me know. --Mike Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>, 2012-07-06 23:12 -0400: > It seems this change in RDFa 1.1 core hasn't been reflected in the > validator yet. http://validator.w3.org/nu gives this error: > Bad value '' for attribute datatype on element h1: Not an absolute IRI. > > Steph. > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com> > Date: Sun, Mar 4, 2012 at 9:16 PM > Subject: Re: Official Response to ISSUE-128 from RDF Web Apps WG > To: "Michael[tm] Smith" <mike@w3.org> > Cc: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org> > > > On 02/26/2012 09:52 PM, Michael[tm] Smith wrote: > > > Resolving this by adding a statement saying that the empty string is > > allowed on all RDFa attributes is acceptable to me, but I think it > > needs to be qualified in some way; specifically, I'd suggest this: > > > > "an empty string for the value of any RDFa attribute MUST be allowed > > as conforming unless a Host Language specifically disallows the > > empty string for a particular attribute" > > > > Mike, we took your advice and clarified a few things during the telecon > last week. The first clarification is this: > > RESOLVED: Host Languages are allowed to specify the valid lexical space > of an element's attribute value. > > RDFa Attribute Value Conformance in Host Languages > http://www.w3.org/2010/02/**rdfa/meetings/2012-03-01#RDFa_** > Attribute_Value_Conformance_**in_Host_Languages<http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/meetings/2012-03-01#RDFa_Attribute_Value_Conformance_in_Host_Languages> > > We hope that the resolution further clarifies that it is a host language > that specifies the conformance criteria for attribute values. This > ensures that the HTML5+RDFa won't create any unnecessary conflicts > between the HTML5 specification and HTML5+RDFa specification. I believe > the only conflict might be @rel/@rev everywhere at this point. In > general, the goal is to create as little incompatibility between > HTML5+RDFa and HTML5 attributes as possible. > > Further editorial language that clarifies the situation will be placed > into the RDFa Core 1.1 specification before it reaches PR status. > > Does this resolution address your remaining concerns? > > > -- manu > > -- > Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny) > President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc. > blog: PaySwarm Website for Developers Launched > http://digitalbazaar.com/2012/**02/22/new-payswarm-alpha/<http://digitalbazaar.com/2012/02/22/new-payswarm-alpha/> -- Michael[tm] Smith http://people.w3.org/mike
Received on Friday, 26 October 2012 06:33:56 UTC