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

Re: RDFa with multiple CURIEs as property..

From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>
Date: Fri, 31 Oct 2008 14:20:34 +0000
Message-ID: <ed77aa9f0810310720g6422c81y45f3e9d02f4fef46@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Svante Schubert" <Svante.Schubert@sun.com>
Cc: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org

Hi Svante,

> thanks for the quick answer.

No problem.


> Instinctively I would drop this feature from the ODF set, as I currently do
> not see the use case (that's why I am here) and keeping it means more effort
> in implementing.
> We have a subset anyway, as some features as Chaining does not work as ODF
> applications are not necessarily DOM applications.

But the documents are XML documents, no? Which means that some
processor could parse them and extract the RDFa, using exactly the
algorithm defined in the XHTML + RDFa spec.


> Could you give me a few examples, where the subject and the object literal
> are the same, but not the predicate?
>
> Always willing to learn ;-)

With all due respect :) we've just spent 4 or so years justifying the
features in RDFa! I don't think we can be expected to now do it again,
for each feature.

RDFa is what it is, now, since it became a Rec. So whilst I'm sure
members of the taskforce would be more than happy to explain some
feature or other in the context of a discussion about how best to use
RDFa, it seems wrong to expect them to justify each feature as part of
an argument about which features to cherry-pick for use in another
language.

In other words -- and most politely meant ;) -- if you would like to
use RDFa in ODF, why not just get on and use it?

As it happens, I believe one of the major flaws with ODF is that it
has this 'pick and choose' mindset, when it comes to including other
languages. It makes it very difficult for authors who are trying to
learn a new technology, because not only are they faced with lots of
new ideas, but they are also then forced to try to work out how the
ODF-flavour differs from the real thing.

This is already a real problem for anyone interested in XForms, for
example; there are only a handful of tutorials about the ODF-specific
version of XForms, whilst there are hundreds of tutorials about XForms
more generally.

I recently did a talk on XForms for the OpenDoc Society in Amsterdam,
at PICNIC [1], and ironically, despite the fact that it was they that
had invited me, was unable to include much at all in my talk, about
the ODF take on XForms, because it differed so much from mainstream
XForms.

It would be a shame if the same mistake was repeated with ODF's version of RDFa.

Regards,

Mark

[1] <http://www.picnicnetwork.org/page/22312/en>

-- 
Mark Birbeck, webBackplane

mark.birbeck@webBackplane.com

http://webBackplane.com/mark-birbeck

webBackplane is a trading name of Backplane Ltd. (company number
05972288, registered office: 2nd Floor, 69/85 Tabernacle Street,
London, EC2A 4RR)
Received on Friday, 31 October 2008 14:21:22 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 31 October 2008 14:21:23 GMT