Syntax typo in the header of section 8.3.2.2
In the header of the section: "Using @href or @src to set the subjectobject".
See the error
report.
This document records errata and corrections suggested by the community in the RDFa specifications as published on the 7 June 2012:
These corrections have no normative status as they have not been incorporated in the specification through the Recommendation Track process. Ivan Herman, Semantic Web Activity lead, is the editor of this document. If you find something in one of the documents listed above that you believe may be an error and wish to have it recorded here, please post your discovery to the public-rdfa mailing list, cc-ing to the editor of this document, Ivan Herman. The community has the possibility to react on the post and, typically after 5-6 business days and unless the community strongly objects for the discovery to be recorded as an official erratum, the entry is added to this list by the editor.
The errata are separated into three sections, corresponding to the three parts of the specification.
Three kinds of changes are highlighted: new, added text and deleted text.
In the header of the section: "Using @href or @src to set the subjectobject".
See the error
report.
The note at the end of section 10.2: "Although vocabulary expansion is described in terms of a vocabulary graph and RDFS OWL 2 entailment rules, processors are free to use any process which obtains equivalent results. "
The table of namespaces in section
2 should also include an entry for owl: with the value http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#
3rd paragraph in the Status section: " Microsoft, and Yandex. It has recieved received review".
The attribute 'inlist', new for version 1.1, is missing in the table of '5.1 Metainformation Attributes Collection' as well as in the related paragraph in section 4
See the error submission
In RDFa 1.1 Primer in section
2.2.3, 2nd, 3rd, and 4th examples, the closing element should be ul,
instead of li.
See the error report
The Note right before section 2.1.4.1 does not take into account the possible effect of the HTTP header (and the number 512 is also wrong). Also, in some cases the processor may process the document even if the character encoding declaration is further down the line but if it gets it within a given amount of time from the server. A possible replacement could be:
An important issue may arise if thehtmlelement contains a large number of prefix declarations. Encoding issues may arise on documents whose character encoding is not set by the transport layer. The character encoding (i.e., UTF-8, UTF-16, ASCII, etc.) used for an HTML5 file is declared using ametaelement in the header in theheadelement. In HTML5 this meta declaration must fall within the first 5121024 bytes of the pagedocument to surely have an effect, or the HTML5 processor (browser, parser, etc.) will may try to detect the encoding using some heuristics. A very "long"htmltag may therefore lead to problems. One way of avoiding the issue is to place most of the prefix declarations on thebodyelement. Another way is to set the character encoding via the HTTP respionse’s Content-Type header.
In the text after the second example in section 2.2.1: "while maintaining an ambiguousunambiguous content".
See the error report
In the text after the fourth example in section 2.2.3: "in setting the the context".
See the error report
The following paragraph (styled as a note) should be added right before section 2.1.1.4:
The vocab attribute references structured data vocabularies, identified using URLs.
RDFa does not limit the form of these URLs or the document formats accessible by de-referencing them;
however users SHOULD aim to use widely shared, conventional values for identifying such vocabularies,
following conventions of case, spelling etc. established by their publishers.
See the error report.
Copyright© 2012 W3C ® (MIT , ERCIM , Keio), All Rights Reserved.
$Id: errata.html,v 1.12 2012-11-22 17:42:21 ivan Exp $