ISSUE-125
CR Comment: comment on section 2.1 @name
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- RDFa
- Raised by:
- Ben Adida
- Opened on:
- 2008-08-14
- Description:
""" I wonder it is misleading to mention @name in section 2.1 of the Syntax document, which implies that @name generates a predicate in RDFa. AFAIK, @name in meta element should be just ignored in RDFa. """ http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Aug/0043.html
- Related emails:
- ISSUE-125: CR Comment: comment on section 2.1 @name (from dean+cgi@w3.org on 2008-08-14)
- meeting record: 2008-08-14 RDFa telecon (from swick@w3.org on 2008-08-14)
- meeting record: 2008-08-21 RDFa Task Force telecon (from swick@w3.org on 2008-08-21)
Related notes:
2008-08-14: Proposed response in http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Aug/0054.html
2008-08-21: Commentor accepts the group's response http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2008Aug/0094.html
2008-08-27: ACTION: Accept
2008-08-27: RESOLUTION: Thank you for catching this. You are absolutely correct, @name has not meaning for RDFa. We will remove that attribute from the list in section 2.1. That text was likely left-over from an earlier draft of the document.
2008-08-27: CHANGE-TYPE: Editorial
2008-08-27: COMMENTER-RESPONSE: Accept