ISSUE-128: Empty list of TERMorCURIEorAbsIRIs should be allowed more explicitly in the spec
empty list of TERMorCURIEorAbsIRIs
Empty list of TERMorCURIEorAbsIRIs should be allowed more explicitly in the spec
- State:
- CLOSED
- Product:
- 3rd LC Comments - RDFa 1.1 Core
- Raised by:
- Ivan Herman
- Opened on:
- 2012-02-09
- Description:
- This is an editorial comment, I believe.
Copying from Mike Smith's comment:
That spec says that the value of the property attribute is:
"a white space separated list of TERMorCURIEorAbsIRIs"
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-core/Overview-src.html#s_syntax
The empty string is not a valid term or CURIE or absolute IRI.
If the intention is that the empty string should be allowed as the value of
the property attribute, then the RDFa Core 1.1 spec needs to instead be
updated to say that the allowed value for the property attribute is,
"a white space separated list of *zero or more* TERMorCURIEorAbsIRIs".
Incidentally, that's true for the values of other attributes as well; the
spec needs to explicitly say either "zero or more" or "one or more" for
them. Lack of that language makes it ambiguous.
On the other hand, we (rarely) use empty @typeof or @datatype. Ie, the editorial changes proposed by Mike make sense to me.
- Related Actions Items:
- No related actions
- Related emails:
- Re: Official Response to ISSUE-128 from RDF Web Apps WG (from mike@w3.org on 2012-03-05)
- Re: Official Response to ISSUE-128 from RDF Web Apps WG (from msporny@digitalbazaar.com on 2012-03-04)
- Re: Official Response to ISSUE-128 from RDF Web Apps WG (from mike@w3.org on 2012-02-27)
- Official Response to ISSUE-128 from RDF Web Apps WG (from msporny@digitalbazaar.com on 2012-02-26)
- [REVISED] Telecon Agenda - February 23rd 2012, 1500 UTC (from msporny@digitalbazaar.com on 2012-02-23)
- ISSUE-128 (empty list of TERMorCURIEorAbsIRIs): Empty list of TERMorCURIEorAbsIRIs should be allowed more explicitly in the spec [3rd LC Comments - RDFa 1.1 Core] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2012-02-09)
Related notes:
There are two potential approaches to this problem:
PROPOSAL: An empty string for the value of all RDFa attributes MUST be allowed as conforming.
OR
PROPOSAL: An empty string for the value of @typeof, @datatype, @about, @resource, @href, @vocab, @content, @src, @rel, @rev, and @inlist is conforming.
PROPOSAL: An empty string for the value of @property and @prefix is not conforming.
RESOLVED: For the purposes of conformance, an empty string for the value of any RDFa attribute MUST be allowed as conforming. (non-substantive)
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/meetings/2012-02-23#resolution_6
Display change log
