[whatwg] Trying to work out the problems solved by RDFa
bhawkeslewis at googlemail.com
Sun Jan 11 01:41:39 PST 2009
On 11/1/09 02:51, Calogero Alex Baldacchino wrote:
> eRDF might be a working compromise, because it doesn't need any changes
> to the spec
It's not possible to author conforming HTML5 that functions as eRDF
since eRDF requires a 'profile' attribute, but HTML5 has removed the
; RDFa covers a wider range of RDF semantics, but requires
> new attributes and also namespaces (a sort of hybrid beteween them might
> avoid the need to bring namespaces - xmlns:* attributes - into html
To avoid xmlns:* attributes, one could drop CURIEs in the text/html
serialization and use markup like:
There's no data loss.
> My suggestion was meant as a mean to test RDFa in HTML
> documents without changing the spec (perhaps in conjunction with
> data-xmlns-*, data-xmlns-prefixes="rdfa foaf <whatever>" to "emulate"
> namespaces - an ugly hack, I know, but at least would avoid changes to
> html serialization, at least in a test phase) -- even if I think that
> xml serialization should work better for such rdf metadata.
I really can't see anybody violating the spec in that way rather than
violating the spec by just adding the RDFa attributes outright,
especially given that there are already people publishing these
attributes in text/html so the "namespace" has already been polluted and
we already have services like SearchMonkey not only using these
attributes but promoting them. It may therefore already be problematic
for a future version of HTML to use these attributes as extension points
without breaking existing sites. The "test" is already in progress, for
better or worse. HTML5 conformance checkers don't have to bless this
test, of course, any more than CSS validators have to give the all clear
to vendor-specific properties.
Moreover, the damage done by immediately breaking the principle that
data-* should be for private use only and turning it into a distributed
extension point may be worse than the alternatives.
More information about the whatwg