W3C

RDFa in XHTML: Syntax and Processing Specification Errata

Last modified:
$Date: 2009/10/22 15:45:17 $
This document records known errors in the document:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-rdfa-syntax-20081014
The latest version of the RDFa in XHTML: Syntax and Processing specification is at:
http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax

Comments on this specification may be sent to www-html-editor@w3.org.

Known errors

  1. Section 5.5 step 6 - The text of step 6 reads "If in any of the previous steps a [new subject] was set to a non-null value, it is now used to provide a subject for type values;". This is somewhat misleading. By the time step 6 is reached, there will ALWAYS be a [new subject]. What this step is really about is that if there is an @typeof attribute, it is used to define the types for the [new subject]. This is clearly described in the explanatory text.
  2. Section 4.1. Document Conformance - In the future it is possible that RDFa will also be defined in the context of HTML. Consequently document authors SHOULD use lower-case prefix names in order to be compatible with current and potential future processors.
  3. Section 5.5 step 9 - The text of step 9 reads in part "The value of the [XML literal] is a string created by serializing to text, all nodes that are descendants of the [current element], i.e., not including the element itself, and giving it a datatype of rdf:XMLLiteral.". For the avoidance of doubt, this means in part that the current default namespace of each descendant element MUST also be included in the emitted XML literal.

Clarifications

  1. Rules for evaluating CURIEs and SafeCURIEs are defined throughout the Recommendation. For the avoidance of doubt, these rules require at least the following:

Webmaster