Lists Home |
Date Index |
Henry S. Thompson wrote:
> Does this mean that RDDL2 documents are _not_ XHTML? This seems a
> backward step to me -- one of the things I _really_ like about RDDL is
> that when you point a browser at a namespace name which points to an
> RDDL doc, something sensible happens.
Most certainly not. http://www.rddl.org/RDDL2 proposes XHTML+RDF formats
(its just a proposal and not yet in final form). I've also shown
http://www.rddl.org/RDDL2-example.html which is an RDF/XML document (not
XHTML despite its extension) that *does* display in a browser -- I doubt
that we'd pick this (pure RDF/XML) format for RDDL2, instead go with a XHTML
+ RDF hybrid.