- From: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 13 Feb 2012 17:21:48 +0100
- To: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Cc: RDF Web Applications Working Group <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Hi Shane, On Mon, Feb 13, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com> wrote: > My immediate reaction to this is "ummm... no?" We can't reverse this order. > It would mean that if there is EVER an @vocab then terms don't work. Why > would we want terms to not work? Or am I missing something? Yes, I explain why in depth in my email (specifically the section "Predefined terms") [1], and Ivan had some thoughts on it as well [2], which I'll reply to as soon as I can. The short answer as to why is: because terms can clash with the intent of authors relying on @vocab to apply uniformly. Kind regards, Niklas [1]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2012Feb/0021.html [2]: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/2012Feb/0024.html > > On 2/13/2012 2:24 AM, RDF Web Applications Working Group Issue Tracker > wrote: >> >> ISSUE-129 (Power of @vocab): Change the power of @vocab, related to >> default term interpretation [3rd LC Comments - RDFa 1.1 Core] >> >> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues/129 >> >> Raised by: Niklas Lindström >> On product: 3rd LC Comments - RDFa 1.1 Core >> >> The essence of the proposal change the rules in 7.4.3 to: >> >> [[[ >> * If there is a local default vocabulary, the IRI is obtained by >> concatenating that value and the term. >> * Otherwise, check if the term matches an item in the list of local >> term mappings. First compare against the list case-sensitively, and if >> there is no match then compare case-insensitively. If there is a >> match, use the associated IRI. >> * Otherwise, the term has no associated IRI and must be ignored. >> ]]] >> >> See related mails >> >> > > -- > Shane McCarron > Managing Director, Applied Testing and Technology, Inc. > +1 763 786 8160 x120 > >
Received on Monday, 13 February 2012 16:22:54 UTC