search

venukb / any23

Automatically exported from code.google.com/p/any23
Apache License 2.0
0 stars 0 forks source link

add support for new prefix mechanism in RDFa 1.1 #143

Closed GoogleCodeExporter closed 9 years ago

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
RDFa1.1[1] it's a working draft that, once approved, will supersede RDFa in 
XHTML[2].
Currently Any23 supports [2] but could be useful to have an Extractor (maybe 
not registered until
[1] becomes a W3C Recommendation) for [1].

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-rdfa-core-20100422/
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2008/REC-rdfa-syntax-20081014/

Original issue reported on code.google.com by dpalmis...@gmail.com on 8 Jun 2011 at 4:13

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by dpalmis...@gmail.com on 8 Jun 2011 at 4:14

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
add a check in the XSLT for the doctype. (default is RDF 1.0).
if doctype is 1.1 then process RDFa compliant to 1.1

Original comment by dpalmis...@gmail.com on 17 Jun 2011 at 10:44

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago

Original comment by dpalmis...@gmail.com on 18 Jun 2011 at 5:24

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
issue renamed.

why: it's not trivial to write an XSLT for RDFa1.1 as already be done for RDFa 
and since the original request from the GoodRelations community was to 
implement just the URI part of RDFa (as described below). I renamed this issue 
to avoid ambiguities.

Hence the main aim of this issue will be to implement to the functionalities 
described in specification sections[1]
    - 5.1 (prefixed attributes) and 
    -  7.4 (CURIE and URI processing)
so to ensure an initial minimal support to the new data layout.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-rdfa-core-20100422/

Original comment by dpalmis...@gmail.com on 20 Jun 2011 at 4:41

GoogleCodeExporter commented 9 years ago 
Closed at Revision1298.

RDFa1.1 is completely backward compatible with RDFa1.0. This means that an 
RDFa1.0 is also an RDFa1.1 valid document. For this reason the rdfa.xslt 
transformation has been modified in the following mode:

- for every CURIE (as defined in RDFa1.1 core specification) we first search 
for 
the namespace definition with @prefix attribute. If unsuccessful we try to 
search
the xmlns traditional definition. 

The specification speaks quite clearly about this point:

"Mappings are defined via @prefix. For backward compatibility, some Host 
Languages may also permit the definition of mappings via @xmlns. In this case, 
the value to be mapped is set by the XML namespace prefix, and the value to map 
is the value of the attribute — a URI. Regardless of how the mapping is 
declared, the value to be mapped must be converted to lower case, and the URI 
is not processed in any way; in particular if it is a relative path it is not 
resolved against the current base. Authors should not use relative paths as the 
URI."

Tests have been done on a simple HTML with all the various combinations of 
prefix definition and CURIEs expansion and on on of the GoodRelations Test case 
for Google[1].

[1] http://www.heppnetz.de/rdfa4google/testcases.html

Original comment by dpalmis...@gmail.com on 25 Jun 2011 at 5:24