W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > February 2004

Re: XHTML and RDF discussion document

From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:50:57 +0000
To: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>, public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20040225155057.32d237c5@hoth.ilrt.bris.ac.uk>

On Wed, 25 Feb 2004 15:39:48 +0100, Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl> wrote:

> 
> At http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2004/02/xhtml-rdf.html is a discussion document
> about XHTML and RDF from the HTML working group.
> 
> The aim is to be able to generate RDF triples from XHTML, be GRDDL
> compatible, allow XHTML documents to validate, and offer authors the ability
> to add semantic information to their documents without the need for HTML to
> be continually extended with new semantic elements such as <person> or
> <number> etc.
> 
> Comments welcome.

I've had a read through and I like the approach;  I recall this being
outlined last year.  It is analgous to the rdf/xml style of a 'frame' of
properties about a single subject.  Here the <meta> stands for
the frame of subjects about the doc, and the inner <meta> are
the properties.

So where I had this example in the RDF/XML syntax doc:
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-syntax-grammar-20040210/#example5


<rdf:Description rdf:about="http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar">
  <ex:editor>
    <rdf:Description>
      <ex:homePage rdf:resource="http://purl.org/net/dajobe/"/>
      <ex:fullName>Dave Beckett</ex:fullName>
    </rdf:Description>
  </ex:editor>
  <dc:title>RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised)</dc:title>
</rdf:Description>

It would become (if embedded in http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar):

<head>
  <meta property="ex:editor">
    <link rel="ex:homePage" href="http://purl.org/net/dajobe/" />
    <meta property="ex:fullName">Dave Beckett</meta>
  </meta>
  <meta property="dc:title">RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised)</meta>
</head>

(I assume an implicit 'about this document' applies)

I could probably translate more of those examples into this form.

<meta> inside a <meta> always implies a blank node in between, never
one with a URI, correct?

Looking at the above, using both rel and property attributes with
qname attributes values on the link and meta elements respectively
does not look like it'll be something people will remember.

Dave
Received on Wednesday, 25 February 2004 10:53:05 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:14:59 GMT