Mark Birbeck wrote: [skip] > > > PROPOSAL > > So to bring everything together, the proposal is: > > (a) RDFa should add support for URIs in attributes that currently only > support CURIEs; > > (b) authors should be encouraged to use safe-CURIEs in those > attributes; > > (c) but since ordinary CURIEs may still be used, we should differentiate > by saying that anything appearing before a colon, that is not a > mapped prefix, is a protocol. >
Isn't it correct that, using the same approach, we can also get away with the requirement that @about and @resource must use URI-s? Ie, that if I want to use curies for @about, I will have to use safe curies? I must admit forgetting about safeness in @about is the most common mistake I make when I author RDFa. Of course, for backward compatibility reasons, we should still allow for safe curies, but we can remove their obligatory nature... I understand that there might be a serious push back on adopting this for attributes like @href and @img, which are 'inherited', so to say, by RDFa, ie, that may have other interpretations. And I would not have any problems excluding @href/@img from this. But for the RDFa specific attributes, ie, @resource and @about, a unified approach to CURIE vs. URI handling would be advantageous in my view. Cheers Ivan -- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
