W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > August 2007

Re: My no-longer pseudo code, the way I understand it:-)

From: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 16:32:43 +0200
Message-ID: <cf8107640708070732u78c6e2b3x3feeffd3c23bc0db@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Ivan Herman" <ivan@w3.org>
Cc: "Hausenblas, Michael" <michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at>, "Shane McCarron" <shane@aptest.com>, "W3C RDFa task force" <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>

Hi Ivan!

I agree with all but the last part of this - regarding xml:base and
inherited subjects. This  is indeed interesting.

I can see your argument, that it may seem strange for @xml:base to
effectively reset what the current (possibly chained) subject is. But
I am not really convinced. Let's say that @xml:base *should* do that.
Not to equate @xml:base with @about, but because the primary usage of
the xml:base mechanism (apart from when used in the root element)
would be to embed fragments from other documents (though I lack
empirical evidence of this).

That would benefit from (perhaps even require) xml:base working as an
opaque URI boundary. Since it does effect relative URI resolution in
e.g. @href outside of RDFa, should it not also permeate the RDFa side
of things? That is, directly effecting the current subject in the same
manner as the document URI (or any @xml:base of the root).

If what you describe is correct, wouldn't it be confusing that the
current subject before an @xml:base "drags along" until "caught" by
another @about?

I'm not entirely certain though, I think this requires a good deal of thought.

(On another note; thank you for the pyRdfa implementation! It came
very timely for me.)

Best regards,
Niklas


On 8/7/07, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
> Well,
>
> I did not really care about validation, to be honest. The XHTML part
> should be changed anyway, because the meta is still in the <body> part.
> For the sake of this mail, let me reproduce the core of the thing:
>
> [[[
>         <body>
>                 <span xml:base="http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/">
>                 <link about="" rel="dc:creator"
> href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/1109404" />
>                 <meta property="dc:title" content="Internet Applications" />
>                 </span>
>         </body>
> ]]]
>
> The sparql part says:
>
> [[[
> ASK WHERE {
>         ?x0 <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/title> "Internet Applications" .
>         <http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/>
> <http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/creator>
> <http://www.blogger.com/profile/1109404> .
> }
> ]]]
>
> which seems to suggest that the value of ?x0 is still pending. pyRdfa
> returns:
>
> [[[
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
> <rdf:RDF
>   xmlns:rdf='http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#'
>   xmlns:dc='http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/'
> >
>   <rdf:Description rdf:about="0004.xhtml">
>     <dc:title>Internet Applications</dc:title>
>   </rdf:Description>
>   <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/">
>     <dc:creator rdf:resource="http://www.blogger.com/profile/1109404"/>
>   </rdf:Description>
> </rdf:RDF>
> ]]]
>
> which I claim _is_ correct (with the caveat that it refers to the file
> name for "" and not to the test URI). Ie, the value of ?x0 should be, in
> my view:
>
> <http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/testsuite/xhtml1-testcases/Test0004.xhtml>
>
> The test _is_ a bit tricky indeed: the <meta> inherits from its parent
> the @about value as a subject, but I do not believe that setting the
> xml:base should change the value of that inherited subject implicitly.
> That is why I believe that the result of pyRdfa is correct...
>
>
> Ivan
>
>
> Hausenblas, Michael wrote:
> >
> > Ivan,
> >
> > Not so sure about @xml:base.
> >
> > What I know is that we have TC 4 [1] on hold
> > because it does not validate due to @xml:base ?!
> >
> > Shane, any thoughts/explanations?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >       Michael
> >
> > [1]
> > http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/RDFa/testsuite/xhtml1-testcases/Test0004
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> >  Michael Hausenblas, MSc.
> >  Institute of Information Systems & Information Management
> >  JOANNEUM RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft mbH
> >  Steyrergasse 17, A-8010 Graz, AUSTRIA
> > ----------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Ivan Herman [mailto:ivan@w3.org]
> >> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2007 3:59 PM
> >> To: Hausenblas, Michael
> >> Cc: W3C RDFa task force
> >> Subject: Re: My no-longer pseudo code, the way I understand it:-)
> >>
> >> One thing, though.
> >>
> >> I ran all my tests from my local machine. Ie, the RDF results
> >> were _not_ what the sparql requires because the base is the
> >> local file name and not the test file URI. It is of course
> >> easy to compare things visually.
> >> Well, that is what you would think: one of my bugs was to
> >> handle the relative URI-s properly and I realized the problem
> >> only in the second or third test:-)
> >>
> >> I wonder whether we should not add an xml:base in most of the
> >> tests (except those that explicitly test xml:base:-).
> >>
> >>
> >> Ivan
> >>
> >> Hausenblas, Michael wrote:
> >>>> -----Original Message-----
> >>>> From: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf-request@w3.org
> >>>> [mailto:public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ivan
> >>>> Herman
> >>>> Sent: Monday, August 06, 2007 2:49 PM
> >>>> To: W3C RDFa task force
> >>>> Subject: Re: My no-longer pseudo code, the way I understand it:-)
> >>>>
> >>>> I have run the tests that are marked as 'approved' either
> >> explicitly
> >>>> under the heading
> >>>>
> >>>> "Review and Approval 2007-08-02"
> >>>>
> >>>> of http://www.w3.org/2006/07/SWD/wiki/RDFaTC or in the series of
> >>>> mails of Ben at the end of last week. After some smallish
> >> bugs here
> >>>> and there that I had to handle:-(, this implementation
> >> passes all of these:
> >>>> 0001, 0006, 0007, 0008, 0009, 0010, 0011, 0012, 0013, 0014, 0018,
> >>>> 0029, 0030, 0031, 0032
> >>>>
> >>>> :-)
> >>> Great! Thanks a lot for this information.
> >>>
> >>> We'll  certainly gather your feedback (and hopefully the
> >> feedback of
> >>> other implementors) and publish it as a 'Implementor's Report'
> >>> - don't know the correct W3Cish term ... but something like this :)
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>     Michael
> >>>
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >>>  Michael Hausenblas, MSc.
> >>>  Institute of Information Systems & Information Management
> >> JOANNEUM
> >>> RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft mbH
> >>>
> >>>  http://www.joanneum.at/iis/
> >>> ----------------------------------------------------------
> >>>
> >>>
> >> --
> >>
> >> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> >> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> >> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
> >> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
> >>
> >
>
> --
>
> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>
>
Received on Tuesday, 7 August 2007 14:39:50 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:15:09 GMT