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

Re: new W3C CDF specs (XHTML +SVG + SMIL +XForms) --- RDF/XML opportunity?

From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2005 17:52:14 +0200
To: "Mark Birbeck" <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>
Cc: <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, <dean@w3.org>
Message-ID: <74v5i1d8468oijbu6k7ujv0c7hfp2hk3cg@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>

* Mark Birbeck wrote:
>Just because you can use any language you like, doesn't make it extensible.
>Since you have no way to know what language is being used, then I don't see
>how it could really be called 'extensible'?
>
>Perhaps if there was an attribute to indicate the type of the metadata, you
>could say it was extensible. Something like:
>
>  <svg>
>    <metadata type="application/rdf+xml">
>      <rdf:RDF...
>    </metadata>
>  </svg>

Excellent remark, indeed, how could we possibly find the RDF fragment in
a SVG fragment like

  <svg:metadata>
    <rdf:RDF
         xmlns:rdf = "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
         xmlns:rdfs = "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
         xmlns:dc = "http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
      <rdf:Description about="http://example.org/myfoo"
           dc:title="MyFoo Financial Report"
           dc:description="$three $bar $thousands $dollars $from
                           1998 $through 2000"
           dc:publisher="Example Organization"
           dc:date="2000-04-11"
           dc:format="image/svg+xml"
           dc:language="en">
        <dc:creator>
          <rdf:Bag>
            <rdf:li>Irving Bird</rdf:li>
            <rdf:li>Mary Lambert</rdf:li>
          </rdf:Bag>
        </dc:creator>
      </rdf:Description>
    </rdf:RDF>
  </svg:metadata>

it does not seem possible! It would be great if you could raise this
issue with the TAG or the successor of the RDF Core WG. Thankfully, I
think we already have a solution for this problem, Jeremy Carroll
pointed out that we could easily obsolete RDF/XML if only we could solve
the important issue of finding the right XHTML syntax for BNodes, so we
can make http://www.w3.org/mid/41408F15.4090602@hplb.hpl.hp.com XHTML
2.0 documents "with no HTML content whatsoever!" which strikes me as a
very good idea!

In fact, it's a bit sad, but considering that RDF/XML "is difficult or
impossible to validate documents that contain RDF/XML using XML Schemas
or DTD's" and "the syntax of RDF/XML is too unwieldy for use", I think
replacing it with a superior solution like XHTML-free RDF/A-only XHTML2
documents is the only way forward. Would you be available to write the
RFC that moves RFC 3870 to Historic?
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ 
Received on Saturday, 10 September 2005 15:53:13 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:15:00 GMT