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

Re: [RDFa] ISSUE-3: syntactic sugar for rdf:type

From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2007 07:50:21 +0100
Message-ID: <640dd5060707162350v462bca15vddd1b5c8df1de276@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Hausenblas, Michael" <michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at>
Cc: "Ben Adida" <ben@adida.net>, RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, "SWD WG" <public-swd-wg@w3.org>

+1

With the qualification that we should follow best-practice on
camel-casing (which I think nowadays is that you don't do it...)



On 17/07/07, Hausenblas, Michael <michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at> wrote:
>
>
> Ben,
>
> I already opted for 'instanceOf' [1] ;)
>
> Cheers,
>         Michael
>
> [1] http://www.w3.org/2007/07/12-rdfa-irc#T15-38-57
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>  Michael Hausenblas, MSc.
>  Institute of Information Systems & Information Management
>  JOANNEUM RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft mbH
>
>  http://www.joanneum.at/iis/
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: public-swd-wg-request@w3.org
> >[mailto:public-swd-wg-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Ben Adida
> >Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2007 2:05 AM
> >To: Ivan Herman
> >Cc: RDFa; SWD WG
> >Subject: Re: [RDFa] ISSUE-3: syntactic sugar for rdf:type
> >
> >
> >
> >Everyone else on the list: time to express an opinion on which
> >attribute
> >name you'd like, ASAP :)
> >
> >-Ben
> >
> >Ivan Herman wrote:
> >> instanceof is still the closest to the RDF meaning, isa
> >refers back to
> >> the usage in turtle. Although I share Steven's uneasiness about the
> >> two-word thing, they still seem to be the best...
> >>
> >> Among the others listed only 'kind' seems to be appropriate.
> >The others
> >> convey some sort of a meaning that rdf:type does not have...
> >>
> >> Ivan
> >>
> >> Ben Adida wrote:
> >>> Hi all,
> >>>
> >>> In today's telecon, we proposed and resolved to use a *new*
> >attribute,
> >>> rather than @class or @role, for the rdf:type syntactic sugar. Thus,
> >>> @class and @role do not currently result in any triples
> >being generated,
> >>> although one may consider that they will in a future version.
> >>>
> >>> The question, then, is which attribute to use. Steven expressed
> >>> reservations about two-word attributes like "isa" or
> >"instanceof", and
> >>> instead proposed: denotes, depicts, represents, category, ilk, kind.
> >>>
> >>> Other thoughts?
> >>>
> >>> I'm partial to "instanceof" and "kind", and I have no additional
> >>> suggestions.
> >>>
> >>> -Ben
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>


-- 
  Mark Birbeck, formsPlayer

  mark.birbeck@x-port.net | +44 (0) 20 7689 9232
  http://www.formsPlayer.com | http://internet-apps.blogspot.com

  standards. innovation.
Received on Tuesday, 17 July 2007 06:50:48 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:15:08 GMT