Comments on: eRDF 1.1 Proposal Discussion http://dubinko.info/blog/2008/07/28/erdf-11-proposal-discussion/ From an XML geek, a reader, a writer, a connector, a man of the people (says keep hope alive) Sat, 01 Oct 2011 16:18:55 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.2 By: Siddharth http://dubinko.info/blog/2008/07/28/erdf-11-proposal-discussion/comment-page-1/#comment-4128 Siddharth Thu, 14 Aug 2008 12:34:35 +0000 http://dubinko.info/blog/?p=308#comment-4128 I always faced many problems while using eRDF I always faced many problems while using eRDF

]]> By: Micahpedia : Micah Dubinko | Blog Archive | Great comment on the eRDF 1.1 discussion http://dubinko.info/blog/2008/07/28/erdf-11-proposal-discussion/comment-page-1/#comment-4087 Micahpedia : Micah Dubinko | Blog Archive | Great comment on the eRDF 1.1 discussion Fri, 08 Aug 2008 03:18:34 +0000 http://dubinko.info/blog/?p=308#comment-4087 [...] the eRDF discussion posting, Toby Inkster, an implementer of eRDF, talks about why it’s bad to steal the id [...] [...] the eRDF discussion posting, Toby Inkster, an implementer of eRDF, talks about why it’s bad to steal the id [...]

]]> By: Toby Inkster http://dubinko.info/blog/2008/07/28/erdf-11-proposal-discussion/comment-page-1/#comment-4084 Toby Inkster Thu, 07 Aug 2008 08:49:45 +0000 http://dubinko.info/blog/?p=308#comment-4084 As the developer of an eRDF parser, I have one major problem with eRDF which is not addressed by this proposed update — the hijacking of the "id" attribute. While authoring eRDF from scratch, eRDF's use of @id makes it awkward to add eRDF to existing pages. If your blog contains a DIV element with id="sidebar" say, you cannot use eRDF within that sidebar to mark up information about the page as a whole: all the eRDF within the sidebar will be assumed to apply to the sidebar only! RDFa doesn't have that problem. Yes, the RDFa spec is only defined in terms of XHTML, but in practice virtually all RDFa parsers support HTML as well. You may still have problems with validation, but using a custom DOCTYPE such as the one used here — http://buzzword.org.uk/2008/html4plus-example — solves most of them (except xmlns attributes). I think an effort to get RDFa working in HTML is more worthy than one to update eRDF. As the developer of an eRDF parser, I have one major problem with eRDF which is not addressed by this proposed update — the hijacking of the “id” attribute. While authoring eRDF from scratch, eRDF’s use of @id makes it awkward to add eRDF to existing pages. If your blog contains a DIV element with id=”sidebar” say, you cannot use eRDF within that sidebar to mark up information about the page as a whole: all the eRDF within the sidebar will be assumed to apply to the sidebar only!

RDFa doesn’t have that problem. Yes, the RDFa spec is only defined in terms of XHTML, but in practice virtually all RDFa parsers support HTML as well. You may still have problems with validation, but using a custom DOCTYPE such as the one used here — http://buzzword.org.uk/2008/html4plus-example — solves most of them (except xmlns attributes).

I think an effort to get RDFa working in HTML is more worthy than one to update eRDF.

]]>