W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > April 2012

Re: Experimental RDFa extractor in JS

From: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2012 17:27:46 +0200
Message-ID: <CADjV5jeqNw0X5vOD9X7S2VJPDN3yJ+D25kT8hvNSbCEZhcS96A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Cc: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>, public-rdfa-wg <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
2012/4/20 Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>:
>
> On Apr 20, 2012, at 15:56 , Gregg Kellogg wrote:
>>
>>> (You should really try out the bookmarklet [1] in a Firefox (ideally
>>> with the JSONView [2] plugin installed). :) I tried it on your own
>>> FOAF page for instance, which is rich in data and really interesting
>>> to examine this way. (Note that @xmlns:* aren't captured yet though,
>>> so the result here isn't really correct.))
>>
>> Running in-browser, access to xmlns* might be challenging.
>>
>
> Actually, you should not use that foaf file, it is rdfa 1.0. I have
>
> http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf-rdfa-1.1/foaf.html
>
> which I keep hidden for now, and I intend to change my core foaf file to this one when 1.1 is a rec.

Ah, nice. With that one the output looks even better. :)


>>> It should be noted that, of course, graph cycles aren't possible to
>>> follow directly in a tree. So any time a reference to an already
>>> created resource description (i.e. a JSON object @id:d with the
>>> resource IRI) is referenced, I just put a link there (an object with
>>> just the @id).
>>
>> Perfect! This is what framing is for, to turn such references into object embeds.
>
> However, about framing... how heavyweight is that framing implementation? The huge advantage of Niklas' implementation is if it is as lightweight as possible...

Yes, I think we're on the same page here (see my full reply to Gregg
for my detailed perspective).

Best regards,
Niklas
Received on Friday, 20 April 2012 15:28:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:55:20 GMT