W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > April 2008

Re: Changing @instanceof to @typeof

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Fri, 04 Apr 2008 10:05:22 -0500
Message-ID: <47F643B2.4020201@aptest.com>
To: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
CC: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>, Elias Torres <elias@torrez.us>, "public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf.w3.org" <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>

I think we could revisit this forever.   The last call comment was that 
"instanceof" was too similar to "instance" from XForms, and since they 
were in the same namespace and markup languages sometimes, we needed to 
avoid this similarity.  We have addressed that last call comment.

Personally, I think the name of the attribute is meaningless.  Could be 
"bagel" for all I care.  At this point we need to stick with the 
decision and move on.  Otherwise we are going to thrash on this (to my 
mind) meaningless issue when we have MUCH larger fish to fry.

Niklas Lindström wrote:
> Hello,
>
> is it only me (and Ralph it seems in the minutes) who find @typeof
> directionally wrong? Why not @oftype or @hastype?
>
> A superficial reading make it seem as "instance" was replaced by its
> exact inverse: "type", which obviously cannot mean the same thing. Or
> am I just misinterpreting how @typeof should be read?
>
> (Part of the thinking of "instanceof" was based on the N3 shorthand
> "is ... of", which is N3:s version of @rev. N3 also has "has" as
> syntax sugar for e.g. '<#me> has foaf:name "Niklas".', why I suggested
> @hastype last year [1]. Along with @a. ;) )
>
> Best regards,
> Niklas
>
> [1] <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-swd-wg/2007Jul/0148.html>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 4, 2008 at 2:32 AM, Ben Adida <ben@adida.net> wrote:
>   
>>  It was considered this morning, and it was outvoted.
>>
>>  -Ben
>>
>>
>>
>>  On Apr 3, 2008, at 5:16 PM, Elias Torres <elias@torrez.us> wrote:
>>
>>
>>     
>>> I had sent an email asking to consider @kind as it picked up more
>>>       
>> interest.
>>     
>>> Is it too late? or did it get rejected at one of the meetings?
>>>
>>> -Elias
>>>
>>> On Apr 3, 2008, at 5:58 PM, Shane McCarron wrote:
>>>
>>>       
>>>> As per my action item earlier today, I have updated the editors draft to
>>>>         
>> reflect the resolution that the name @instanceof be changed to @typeof.  I
>> have also updated the DTD.  Note that until implementations and the test
>> cases are updated, things will not validate!
>>     
>>>> Draft is at http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/2008/ED-rdfa-syntax-20080403/
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
>>>> Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
>>>> ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>         
>>>
>>>       
>>     

-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Friday, 4 April 2008 15:06:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:27 UTC