W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > June 2009

Re: .htaccess a major bottleneck to Semantic Web adoption / Was: Re: RDFa vs RDF/XML and content negotiation

From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
Date: Mon, 29 Jun 2009 14:05:26 +0100
To: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>
Cc: Tom Heath <tom.heath@talis.com>, martin.hepp@ebusiness-unibw.org, Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, public-lod@w3.org, semantic-web at W3C <semantic-web@w3c.org>
Message-Id: <1246280726.1981.21.camel@ophelia2.g5n.co.uk>
On Mon, 2009-06-29 at 13:30 +0100, Mark Birbeck wrote:
> If we go back a step, RDFa was carefully designed so that it could
> carry any combination of the RDF concepts in an HTML document. In the
> end we dropped reification and lists, because it didn't seem that the
> RDF community itself was clear on the future of those, but they are
> both easily added back if the issues were to be resolved.

RDF reification and lists do *work* in RDFa, they're just a bit of a
pain to mark up.

e.g. here's a reification:

<div xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
    xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
    xmlns:db="http://dbpedia.org/resource/"
    typeof="rdf:Statement">
  <span property="dc:creator">Mark Birkbeck</span> says that
  <span rel="rdf:subject" resource="[db:Sky]">the sky</span>
  <span rel="rdf:predicate" resource="http://dbpedia.org/property/color"
      >is</span>
  <span rel="rdf:object" resource="[db:Blue]">blue</span>.
</div>

And an example of a list can be found here:

http://ontologi.es/rail/routes/gb/VTB1.xhtml

-- 
Toby A Inkster
<mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk>
<http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Monday, 29 June 2009 13:06:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Sunday, 31 March 2013 14:24:21 UTC