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

Re: Comments on RDF/A spec

From: Ben Adida <ben@mit.edu>
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2005 16:15:46 -0400
Message-Id: <B5DEDA0A-D3ED-4AB9-9742-46C9AFFAA293@mit.edu>
Cc: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hpl.hp.com>


Thanks for the comments! Answers below, in particular, please check  
out my questions to comments 6 and 7... I'm not sure I completely  
understand the issues you raised.

> Looks very good. Fixes the inheritance problems of last year's  
> version.
> Although, with this certain idioms might become a bit wordy (e.g.  
> an object consisting
> of a bnode with properties hanging off it, now is best marked up as  
> explicit triples, one after the other, with no nesting). No change  
> suggested.

Yes, indeed, could be a bit wordy. I'm trying to partially address  
that with predicate inheritance under specific circumstances:


> At least one issue not on list:
> - language tags in XML Literals, see comment 7 below.
> 1) encoding

should be fixed with the new document:

> 2) section 2.2 para before 2.2.1
> Suggest
> s/an [RDF URI /a subject [RDF URI/

yes, fixed.

> 3) end section 4.2
> suggest duplicating example with both rel and rev attributes


> 4) 4.3.3
> The behaviour of the id attribute in the context statement of the  
> meta or link needs to be made explicit here. Such behaviour does  
> not apply when the context statement is itself a meta or link.

yes, I've marked this, I need to figure out how to word carefully.

> 5)
> Minor comment: it is possible to use rdf:XMLLiteral and content  
> attribute. However an exmaple is hard to construct, more later,  
> possibly much later.

okay, I'll wait for your example to do something here, but will mark  
an issue.

> 6) Typed literals
> The document seems to only allow typed literals with content attribute
> I think we can also permit typed literals with lexical form given  
> by the concatenation of the text() descendents of the element.

can you say a bit more about this? Is this a similar issue to #5 above?

> 7) lang tag in XML Literals, 4.4.1
> The  behaviour for literal objects, no content attribute, and no  
> datatype attribute constructs an rdf:XMLLiteral and looses any lang  
> tag from the context. I suggest this is a mistake, and should be  
> fixed by inserting a span or div as appropriate.

can you send an example

> 8) plain literals from text() nodes
> There is no method for generating plain literals from the children  
> text() nodes.
> Plain literals can only be generated using the @content attribute.
> This may have been desirable behaviour. No change suggested.

We may want to allow for concatenation of text() nodes... I'll add  
that as an issue to


Received on Wednesday, 26 October 2005 20:15:45 UTC

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