- From: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
- Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2011 14:18:21 +0100
- To: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Cc: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>, public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
2011/11/12 Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>: > On Fri, 11 Nov 2011 18:21:14 +0100 > Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Shouldn't that be 'usesVocabulary', as per [1]? > > I don't like that very much. > > A good RDF predicate is one that fits naturally into the following two > phrases: > > "has ..." > "is ... of" > > For example > > "has homepage" > "is homepage of" > > But consider: > > "has usesVocabulary" > "is usesVocabulary of" > > Anything wrong with <http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfa#vocab>? That way the > predicate matches the name of the attribute. Actually there are a number of common predicates which don't follow this pattern (of a property noun) but rather a verb. For instance in Dublin Core there is 'replaces', 'requires', 'references' and 'conformsTo'; in FOAF there is 'knows', 'depicts' and 'based_near'. The argument for 'usesVocabulary' over 'hasVocabulary' was to indicate that the document doesn't "have" this vocabulary but uses it. That said, I wouldn't mind 'vocab' instead, since that is what the attribute is called. I think I'd even prefer it. Do you have an opinion regarding whether the object should be an IRI or a literal? Best regards, Niklas
Received on Sunday, 13 November 2011 13:19:13 UTC