Revision as of 12:02, 25 August 2007

Profile URIs

In hcalendar-issues, it is ACCEPTED that each microformat should have a profile URI, like [the XFN profile].

Some issues include:

what domain to use? Candidates include:
- microformats.org
- www.w3.org
- xmdp.org
what about versioning? How to keep in sync with the wiki and test materials?
what profile URI to use for combinations, such as hcard and hcalendar?
- note HTML4.01 states "that one or more meta data profiles, [are] separated by white space"; though it's simpler for authors if they can just use one profile URI.
More profiles are needed.

One proposal is: use www.w3.org, following W3C namespace policy. As to versioning, change the profile whenever the wiki changes (within some reasonable latency, say, a couple weeks or a month). For example: an hCard Profile at w3.org, and discussion: an hCard profile that seems to work with GRDDL.

<head profile="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2731.txt http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard">

However, this is valid according to the W3C HTML validator.

@@ Line 19: / Line 19: @@
 Due to [http://sourceforge.net/tracker/index.php?func=detail&aid=1264455&group_id=27659&atid=390963 inconsistent wording of the HTML specs], HTMLTidy (and other tools?) give "[http://sourceforge.net/mailarchive/forum.php?thread_name=oytAFzxaKxiFFwpx%40pigsonthewing.org.uk&forum_name=htmlvalidator-help Warning: <head> escaping malformed URI reference]"
-when more than one profile is used (e.g. <code><head profile="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2731.txt http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard">
+when more than one profile is used, e.g.
-</code>). However, this is '''''valid''''' according to the W3C HTML validator.
+ <code><head profile="http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2731.txt http://www.w3.org/2006/03/hcard"></code>
+However, this is '''''valid''''' according to the W3C HTML validator.
 ==See also==