W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-data-tf@w3.org > October 2011

Re: Data blocks, not marked up content

From: Martin Hepp <martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org>
Date: Mon, 10 Oct 2011 10:26:36 +0200
Cc: public-html-data-tf@w3.org, Thomas Steiner <tomac@google.com>, Lin Clark <lin.w.clark@gmail.com>, jeni@jenitennison.com, gavin@topquadrant.com
Message-Id: <043BB4F4-688A-4B9E-AD0D-69B44DBFDC09@ebusiness-unibw.org>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Hi Ivan,
You may know that I am a big fan of Turtle; in fact, I do ALL of my modeling (even GoodRelations etc.) in Turtle and have my proprietary tool-chain for deriving RDF/XML, HTML, etc. from that.

As far as data in HTML is concerned, the approach that I recommend also in my trainings is to model the data in Turtle and then convert it into RDFa using our tool

http://www.ebusiness-unibw.org/tools/rdf2rdfa/

Toby Inkster and I (and others) had an exchange on using Turtle in HTML a few years ago, see

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2010Nov/0233.html
http://www.w3.org/wiki/N3inHTML

So theoretically, Turtle in HTML would be really cool, for it will save the extra step of creating the RDFa serialization.
However, in practice I think that Turtle will look so odd to the HTML-used eyes of the Web developers that matter for broad adoption of structured data in markup that it won't make it to the wild.

 
On Oct 10, 2011, at 10:12 AM, Ivan Herman wrote:

> Martin,
> 
> I agree with the need for this.
> 
> The question that does arise is whether your applications were clearer if they could make use of a separate block in turtle (see the Turtle draft[1]) or whether the hidden data is more appropriate for you. Judging the cut-and-paste requirement I suspect your answer is the latter, but I think the question is worth asking.
> 
> Thanks
> 
> Ivan
> 
> [1] http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/index.html#in-html
> 
> 
> On Oct 10, 2011, at 08:39 , Martin Hepp wrote:
> 
>> Hi Tom, all:
>> 
>> A bit of background why we think that invisible markup is an important option for
>> 
>> 1. non-trivial data structures, in particular if they
>> 2. do not correspond to the organization of the visible content is here:
>> 
>> Hepp, Martin; García, Roberto; Radinger, Andreas: RDF2RDFa: Turning RDF into Snippets for Copy-and-Paste, Technical Report TR-2009-01, 2009.
>> 
>> A PDF is here: http://www.heppnetz.de/files/RDF2RDFa-TR.pdf
>> 
>> This is even more important if you face messy, complicated HTML markup as in article detail pages, because the heuristics for dealing with RDFa in lax HTML are more reliable if the RDFa snippet itself is a self-contained block - e.g. forgotten closing elements cannot break the structure of the data.
>> 
>> By the way, despite that Google discourages invisible markup officially, they ingest and display it, as long as it comes from an otherwise trustworthy page / domain name space. I have lots of examples for this ;)
>> 
>> Best
>> 
>> Martin
>> 
>>> And to be clear: I did not advocate this. I am just saying that this is certainly an approach.
>> Sure thing. I think it came from the fact that some CMS-es don't grant
>> users enough edit rights, so adding invisible blocks was seen as an
>> ugly, but valid hack to get the structured data out there. I _think_
>> Martin Hepp coined the idea, but I am entirely unsure.
>> 
>> Tom
>> 
>> -- 
>> Thomas Steiner, Research Scientist, Google Inc.
>> 
>> http://blog.tomayac.com, http://twitter.com/tomayac
>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> ----
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> mobile: +31-641044153
> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
Received on Monday, 10 October 2011 08:27:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 10 October 2011 08:27:06 GMT