W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > November 2005

Re: Comments on RDF/A Syntax (Editor's Draft 27 October 2005)

From: Ben Adida <ben@mit.edu>
Date: Sun, 27 Nov 2005 17:41:40 -0500
Message-Id: <5B50D73F-4F50-40C1-8E1A-3442A93EF4E2@mit.edu>
Cc: <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
To: Jeremy Wong 黃泓量 <jeremy@miko.hk>


Thanks for your comments. A quick response below.

> 1. "rdf:about" instead of "about"
> "rdf:about" is pretty well-known. To learn a new attribute,  
> "rdf:about" and "about" are no difference. Just a name to remember...
> e.g., <p rdf:about=""><a rel="dc:creator"  
> href="mailto:bill.gates@microsoft.com">Bill Gates</a> blah blah</p>
> => { <> dc:creator <mailto:bill.gates@microsoft> . }

Having rdf:about but xhtml2:rel, xhtml2:property, and xhtml2:href  
seems inconsistent. Having them all scoped as rdf: is not possible  
without adding to that namespace, which seems like overkill.

Note also that rdf:about is completely unknown to the HTML community,  
so I suspect this would cause more confusion than consistency.

> 2. use the "type" attribute for typed literal
> The "type" attribute is from the anchor element.
> e.g., <p rdf:about=""><a rel="dc:date"  
> type="xsd:dateTime">2005-11-25T00:46:00+0800</a> blah blah</p>
> => { <> dc:date "2005-11-25T00:46:00+0800"^^xsd:dateTime . }

So you're suggesting "type" instead of "datatype". I'm not expert  
enough on this issue to say which is better. Any particular reason  
for your suggestion?

> 3. use of Production "propertyAttr" [1]
> I recommend to use "propertyAttr" for the case of "nodeElement" [2]  
> only, never "emptyPropertyElt" [3]
> e.g. <p rdf:about="" dc:subject="SemanticWeb">blah blah blah</p>
> => { <> dc:subject "SemanticWeb" . }

This is an issue which we've currently put off. In the current draft,  
a property is never declared as an attribute except in special HTML- 
specific cases (like class and role). We may take this up again,  
though right now we're leaning towards simpler, fewer methods of  
saying the same thing.

Received on Sunday, 27 November 2005 22:42:09 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:19 UTC