ISSUE-36: Should Profile documents allow the specification of a default vocabulary?

Default vocab specification

Should Profile documents allow the specification of a default vocabulary?

State:

CLOSED

Product:

RDFa 1.1 Core

Raised by:

Manu Sporny

Opened on:

2010-07-16

Description:

Markus proposed that Profile documents should allow the creation of a default vocabulary:

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2010May/0041.html

This has a number of implications:

1. How does one declare a default vocabulary via the profile document?
2. How does the declaration affect the @vocab attribute, would it override it and if so, in what order?
3. How does the declaration affect the CURIEs like ":next"?

The biggest question is the value of this feature? What is the use case that we are attempting to support? Does this overly-complicate RDFa without much payback?

Related Actions Items:

No related actions

Related emails:

1. Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-36: default vocab specification (from ivan@w3.org on 2010-09-06)
2. PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-36: default vocab specification (from msporny@digitalbazaar.com on 2010-09-05)
3. Re: ISSUE-36: Notice of RDFa Profiles allowing rdfa:vocabulary predicate (from msporny@digitalbazaar.com on 2010-07-29)
4. ISSUE-36: Notice of RDFa Profiles allowing rdfa:vocabulary predicate (from msporny@digitalbazaar.com on 2010-07-29)
5. Re: Telecon Agenda - July 29th 2010, 1400 UTC (from ivan@w3.org on 2010-07-29)
6. Re: ISSUE-36: Specifying a default vocabulary via an RDFa Profile (from ivan@w3.org on 2010-07-26)
7. Re: ISSUE-36: Specifying a default vocabulary via an RDFa Profile (from shane@aptest.com on 2010-07-25)
8. Re: ISSUE-36: Specifying a default vocabulary via an RDFa Profile (from ivan@w3.org on 2010-07-25)
9. Re: ISSUE-36: Specifying a default vocabulary via an RDFa Profile (from markus.gylling@gmail.com on 2010-07-23)
10. Re: ISSUE-36: Specifying a default vocabulary via an RDFa Profile (from ivan@w3.org on 2010-07-23)
11. Re: ISSUE-36: Specifying a default vocabulary via an RDFa Profile (from tai@g5n.co.uk on 2010-07-22)
12. ISSUE-36: Specifying a default vocabulary via an RDFa Profile (from shane@aptest.com on 2010-07-22)
13. Re: ISSUE-36 (Default vocab specification): Should Profile documents allow the specification of a default vocabulary? [RDFa 1.1 Core] (from ivan@w3.org on 2010-07-17)
14. Re: ISSUE-36 (Default vocab specification): Should Profile documents allow the specification of a default vocabulary? [RDFa 1.1 Core] (from shane@aptest.com on 2010-07-16)
15. Re: ISSUE-36 (Default vocab specification): Should Profile documents allow the specification of a default vocabulary? [RDFa 1.1 Core] (from martin@weborganics.co.uk on 2010-07-16)
16. Re: ISSUE-36 (Default vocab specification): Should Profile documents allow the specification of a default vocabulary? [RDFa 1.1 Core] (from shane@aptest.com on 2010-07-16)
17. Re: ISSUE-36 (Default vocab specification): Should Profile documents allow the specification of a default vocabulary? [RDFa 1.1 Core] (from tai@g5n.co.uk on 2010-07-16)
18. Re: ISSUE-36 (Default vocab specification): Should Profile documents allow the specification of a default vocabulary? [RDFa 1.1 Core] (from msporny@digitalbazaar.com on 2010-07-16)
19. Re: ISSUE-36 (Default vocab specification): Should Profile documents allow the specification of a default vocabulary? [RDFa 1.1 Core] (from martin@weborganics.co.uk on 2010-07-16)
20. ISSUE-36 (Default vocab specification): Should Profile documents allow the specification of a default vocabulary? [RDFa 1.1 Core] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2010-07-16)

Related notes:

Display change log