On 15 Oct 2007, at 12:25, Ivan Herman wrote:
Bijan did not copy this to the RDFa task force, though the content of
the mail is really relevant for this group, because he proposes an
extra
RDFa syntax. (Bijan, I hope that is all right with you.)
It's fine.
My initial reaction on what he proposes: it does make sense. If we
define some sort of a general 'pre-processor' or hGRDDL formalism,
that
could be a typical case for it. I would not have a problem saying
that a
preprocessor goes through the DOM tree before processing and would
change each occurrence of:
<.... content-date="2007-12-12" ...>
into
<.... content="2007-12-12" datatype="xsd:date" ...>
by delegating that into the preprocessor the syntax document's formal
processing steps might stay unchanged.
That sounds reasonable.
Having said that: at the f2f meeting last week we, sort of, decided to
get into a 'feature freeze' mode as soon as possible to get the syntax
document out and on the Rec track. This may be one of those features
that might be relegated into a future version...
That's understandable. I'll just add that personally I'll have
difficulty recommending RDFa (at least with datatypes) with the
existing syntax. For some applications that might be fine as I could
post processes plain literals by a combination of sniffing the
content and knowing something about the property.
Cheers,
Bijan.
