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

Re: telecon Thursday, 1600 UTC

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Sun, 23 Dec 2007 08:54:42 +0100
Message-ID: <476E1442.9090305@w3.org>
To: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
CC: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>

Ben Adida wrote:
> This is more complicated than it needs to be, in particular whether
> there is a hanging rel or not does not affect the parsing of
> @instanceof. Here's how I would write the rule:
>   The subject of @instanceof on element X is:
> 	- the value of @about if @about exists on X, _otherwise_
> 	- the value of @src if @src exists on X, _otherwise_
> 	- a new blank node corresponding to element X
>   In all cases:
> 	- the subject of @instanceof may complete hanging @rel's just like any
> other subject declaration does, _and_
> 	- the subject of @instanceof becomes the inherited subject for child
> elements, _and_
> 	- the subject of @instanceof is also the subject for @rel, @property
> (and the object for @rev) when those attributes are present on X.
> In your mental model, there is basically only one thing missing:
> @instanceof is syntactic sugar for @rel="rdf:type" _but_ with an
> explicit setting of @about to a new bnode if there is no other explicit
> subject.
> Hopefully, that makes you happier :)

Well... not really:-(

- the rules that you describe above have the merit;-) to be clear. I may
have missed it before, but that is the first time I see them so clearly
stated; thanks!!!!

- but... why? I mean: why is it necessary to introduce an extra rule?
Why isn't it good enough to equate it to the behaviour of @rel and that
is it?


> -Ben


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 Sunday, 23 December 2007 07:54:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:25 UTC