W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > May 2010

Feedback on RDFa Core 1.1

From: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 19:01:42 +0000
Message-ID: <y2g1452bf811005021201oc3efe806r448d16832391370b@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
Hi,

This is feedback on the RDFa 1.1 core W3C Working Draft 22 April 2010
http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-rdfa-core-20100422/

[[[
biblio:  	http://example.org/biblio/0.1
]]]
any reason for not using an existing biblio ontology such a bibo:
@prefix bibo: <http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/> .
and further bibo:Book which is an existing class?

[[[
    '<span about="urn:ISBN:0091808189" typeof="biblio:book"
]]]
how about using some common practice and capitalize RDF classes, e.g.
biblio:Book?

[[[
  prefix="biblio: http://example.org/
]]]
why not being consistent and reuse the same namespace defined earlier?

[[[
The general syntax of a CURIE can be summarised as follows:
]]]
s/summarised/summarized (or do W3C documents use British spelling?)

[[[
For example, the full URI for Albert Einstein on DPPedia is:
]]]
s/DPPedia/DBPedia

[[[
<#bbq> cal:dtastart "2015-09-16T16:00:00-05:00"^^xsd:dateTime .
]]]
s/cal:dtastart/cal:dtstart

[[[
  <span property="foaf:givenname">Albert</span>
foaf:givenName
same for _:a foaf:givenname "Albert" .
]]]
s/foaf:givenname/foaf:givenName

[[[
_:a foaf:name "Alber Einstein" .
]]]
s/Alber Einstein/Albert Einstein (2 occurrences)

[[[
taxo:  	http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/taxonomy/
]]]
This prefix is not used anywhere in the document.

I hope to have more comments in the future as I digest more of the
draft, but this is it for today...

Steph.
Received on Sunday, 2 May 2010 19:02:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:55:06 GMT