W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-egov-ig@w3.org > December 2012

Re: [DataGov-DEV] Updated Microdata to RDF Working Draft

From: Gannon Dick <gannon_dick@yahoo.com>
Date: Wed, 19 Dec 2012 07:12:04 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <1355929924.47174.YahooMailNeo@web112612.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
To: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>, Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net>
Cc: egov-ig mailing list <public-egov-ig@w3.org>
I've made an XML rendition of RFC 2396[1] as a companion to stratml:PerformancePlansOrReports (input the gov gateway url(s) to PERL).  The idea is that the Plan (in Andre's List) describes an  application (with multiple data sources) The Plan Source points to "this list" of current datasets in which the app factoids can be found.  The parsing algorythim in  RFC 2396 uses RegEx and splits (authority/domain/curren version/"real time") (path) (fragment|query).  Each citation is marked up with RDFa 1.1 Lite.  I have examples for id.loc.gov, the Census API and Weather (NOAA), a DTD and (working) XSD Schema (with Unicode Compliance), with a text section (although I could include embeds like MADSRDF, or MADS-SKOS for id.loc.gov.  The point is, for Local Governments, to avoid the virtual gatekeeper effect of Search Engines on the Public Domain as apps age.

I'll publish as soon as my admin password works again on RUSTPrivacy.ORG (note to self: going on two weeks, grrrrr).  Owen, I can send you a prototype if you want.  I'll be sending Joe and Andre the DTD Entity files/ XSLT to convert HTML Entities to Escaped Unicode.


[1] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt

 From: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>
To: Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net> 
Cc: egov-ig mailing list <public-egov-ig@w3.org> 
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 8:15 PM
Subject: Re: [DataGov-DEV] Updated Microdata to RDF Working Draft
On Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 8:50 PM, Owen Ambur <Owen.Ambur@verizon.net> wrote:
> Ed, OMB's official guidance to agencies on implementation of section 10 of the GPRA Modernization Act (GPRAMA) says they may use XML, JSON, spreadsheets or CSVs in order to meet the requirement to publish their strategic and performance plans and reports in machine-readable format... but not PDF or HTML -- at least not without "enhanced structural elements".[1]

I couldn't help but chuckle at how [1] is a PDF. I get your point
however, which I think reinforces mine, that there is no US federal
policy that prefers RDFa 1.1 over HTML Microdata for publishing
metadata in HTML.

Received on Wednesday, 19 December 2012 15:12:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:00:50 UTC