- From: Pete Johnston <p.johnston@ukoln.ac.uk>
- Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2005 13:24:49 +0100
- To: Ben Adida <ben@mit.edu>
- CC: www-rdf-interest@w3.org, public-rdf-in-xhtml task force <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Ben Adida wrote: > Specifically, we're considering assigning a RDF property to the ROLE > attribute in HTML, for example: > > ========== > <div role="dcterms:abstract"> > .... the summary of the document.... > </div> > ========== > > would yield a triple: > > ========== > _:div0 xhtml2:role dcterms:abstract . > ========== > > The question is, what should xhtml2:role be? Should it be simply > rdf:type? Should it be xhtml2:role with no relationship to rdf:type? Given that DCMI defines dcterms:abstract (URI= http://purl.org/dc/terms/abstract) as a property not a class - i.e. it's use is document has-abstract summary rather than document is-a abstract - I don't think you want an rdf:type relationship (or subproperty of rdf:type)? Or maybe you do, and the use of dcterms:abstract isn't a good example of a typical value of the role attribute? > How should we go about making this decision? Are there guidelines for > subclassing rdf:type? Cheers Pete
Received on Monday, 17 October 2005 12:23:25 UTC