Hi Christoph, Christoph LANGE wrote: > > BTW, another related question: When generating XHTML+RDFa from a formal > representation that is already RDF-compatible in itself (e.g. RDF/XML, e.g. > OWL, e.g. OMDoc, …), I suppose that both the original representation and the > XHTML+RDFa should use the same URIs for the same things. Suppose the original > document, e.g. having the URI doc.omdoc, contains a triple with subject > #resource, and suppose we generate doc.xhtml with RDFa from it. A naïve > translation might create something like <div about="#resource">, i.e. talk > about a resource doc.xhtml#resource. But I guess it should rather be <div > about="doc.omdoc#resource">, as the formal concept will stay the same, > regardless of its presentation. Are there similar experiences from, e.g., > generating XHTML+RDFa from OWL? > I do not know about generating from OWL, but I fully agree with the rest. There should be one URI. In my own authoring I use <base> extensively, as well as protected CURIE-s for @about (and that is also why I am happy that I will be able to use, possibly, curies directly...). I avoid thereby to generate URI-s with the filename as a base URI which is, most of the time in my experience, is the _wrong_ one... Ivan > Cheers, > > Christoph > -- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Tuesday, 1 December 2009 11:00:11 UTC