W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > August 2006

following your nose from an RDFa document to the RDFa spec

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2006 13:44:13 -0500
To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
Message-Id: <1154630653.16297.162.camel@dirk.w3.org>

In the new GRDDL WG, Fabien Gandon recently gave a pointer
to some work on RDFa and GRDDL...
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-grddl-wg/2006Jul/0015.html
-> http://www-sop.inria.fr/acacia/soft/sweetwiki.html
and especially
  http://www-sop.inria.fr/acacia/soft/RDFa2RDFXML.xsl

In #swig chat[1], Elias reminded me of some RDFa test data
  http://svn.rdflib.net/trunk/test/rdfa/

I tried RDFa2RDFXML.xsl on the 000001.htm test and I'm
getting different results from 000001.ttl .

So I wonder if the spec says which one is right, and
I tried to follow my nose to find it.

There doesn't seem to be anything in the 000001.htm
test document that says "this is not just any HTML document;
it's an HTML document with RDF data inside; any RDF triples
you extract per the RDFa spec are indeed meant by the author."

Please add some such signal to the test data, so that
there's a chain of authority from the URI spec
to the HTTP spec to the MIME specs, then somehow
to the RDFa spec, a la 
section 3.1.1. Details of retrieving a representation
of webarch
 http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#dereference-details


I prefer a GRDDL-compatible signal; i.e. either
  (a) change the namespace document
   at http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml to refer
   to have a GRDDL namespaceTransformation link
   to something like RDFa2RDFXML.xsl, or

  (b) change the namespace of the 000001.htm document
   to something like http://www.w3.org/2006/08/xhtml-rdf
   or perhaps http://www.w3.org/2002/06/xhtml2/ per [xhtml2]
   and arrange for a namespace document there with
   a namespaceTransformation link
   to RDFa2RDFXML.xsl , or

  (c) add a profile to the 000001.htm document to
   an RDFa profile, which has a profileTransformation
   link to RDFa2RDFXML.xsl , or

  (d) add the GRDDL profile (http://www.w3.org/2003/g/data-view )
   to the 000001.htm document and add
   <link rel="transformation"
href="http://www-sop.inria.fr/acacia/soft/RDFa2RDFXML.xsl" />


I gather that the draft that was used to prepare the RDF
test data in http://svn.rdflib.net/trunk/test/rdfa/ is
http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/2005-rdfa-syntax

In there, I see
"The aim of RDF/A is to allow [RDF graph]s to be carried in XML
documents of any type."

p.s. the 000001.htm says that it's XHTML 1.0 transitional,
but it has role and property attributes. Hmm... the
validation service says "Sorry, I am unable to validate this document
because its content type is text/plain, which is not currently supported
by this service." So actually, the document doesn't say that
it's XHTML 1.0 transitional; it says that it's plain text.
So following ones nose a la web architecture won't even get
as far as the XML or XHTML specs; it'll stop cold at text/plain.
That's perhaps just a test suite hosting issue, but please let's
do get some real test data where we can follow our nose all the
way thru from the URI of the document thru the stack of
specs to the RDF triples and then thru the URIs in those triples
and so on.


[1] http://chatlogs.planetrdf.com/swig/2006-08-03#T18-18-51


[xhtml2] http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/conformance.html#doccont

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Thursday, 3 August 2006 18:44:31 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:15:02 GMT