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

Re: RDFa Lite and non-RDFa @rel values

From: Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2012 12:53:13 -0700
Message-ID: <CABp3FNJdfubzok5q5UGFPDT-8pBnC3vJanAwTZkA2Yh6=-3jkg@mail.gmail.com>
To: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 12:23 PM, Stéphane Corlosquet
<scorlosquet@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alex,
>
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 3:08 PM, Alex Milowski <alex@milowski.com> wrote:
>>
>> This doesn't feel like a positive step.  I have certainly relied on
>> the local default vocabulary letting me use my own terms in @rel/@rev
>> values.  In the particular case of recent HTML applications of RDFa,
>> I've actually just used "standard" @rel values like "related".
>
>
> What do you mean by "standard" @rel values? standard in the context of RDFa
> or HTML?

The profile for HTML lists terms defined (or used to be defined)
within HTML.  Many of them trace back to the IANA link relations.  The
current take within HTML5 seems a bit different than in the past.  The
HTML4 specification said:

"Authors may wish to define additional link types not described in
this specification. If they do so, they should use a profile to cite
the conventions used to define the link types. "

With respect to RDFa, @rel is just an attribute whose value is
interpreted according to RDFa's rules.  The initial context takes care
of priming the algorithm in the case of HTML.


>>
>>  I expect a triple to be generated for @rel="related".
>
>
> Most people won't expect this triple to be generated, and they won't expect
> the behavior of @property alongside @rel either. In my view your case
> qualifies as advanced use of RDFa. Would you also expect a triple in the
> case where you had @rel="nofollow" (in the HTML sense)?

I see no point in restricting generation of triples for these things.
Using @rel="related" or other such values, even limited to the small
set enumerated in HTML (whatever version), is very useful.   In fact,
using @rel only would seem to be the simple use case and using
@property for the same thing would be the more advanced use.

Is there harm in extra triples?

That is, harm besides the conflict identified between @rel and
@property on the same link?

-- 
--Alex Milowski
"The excellence of grammar as a guide is proportional to the paucity of the
inflexions, i.e. to the degree of analysis effected by the language
considered."

Bertrand Russell in a footnote of Principles of Mathematics
Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2012 19:53:42 GMT

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