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

Re: comment on the RDFa Core review comments

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 11:43:02 +0100
Cc: W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <8A0BF2F4-F287-43A2-A239-F41FEE8A7190@w3.org>
To: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
:-)

Ivan

On Jan 25, 2012, at 11:39 , Michael Hausenblas wrote:

> 
> Please, please, please do me a favour and drop 'my' figure. This is prior art from some four years ago and certainly only confuses people.
> 
> /me over and out.
> 
> Cheers,
> 	Michael
> --
> Dr. Michael Hausenblas, Research Fellow
> LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre
> DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute
> NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway
> Ireland, Europe
> Tel. +353 91 495730
> http://linkeddata.deri.ie/
> http://sw-app.org/about.html
> 
> On 25 Jan 2012, at 10:34, Ivan Herman wrote:
> 
>> And yet another point...
>> 
>> A while ago, when we were discussing the restructuring of the processing steps with @property, I have come up with a complete diagram (well, a series thereof) for the processing steps.
>> 
>> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/Processing
>> 
>> I am not sure it is 100% correct, I am not sure it is 100% useful... but I wonder whether this is something we want to use for something.
>> 
>> Caveat: I made a mess and I lost the original source for this (I guess it was either keynote or powerpoint) so I would have to reproduce it if we decided to use this. But that can be done, of course.
>> 
>> Ivan
>> 
>> 
>> On Jan 25, 2012, at 11:18 , Ivan Herman wrote:
>> 
>>> Taking a somewhat more general view.
>>> 
>>> The figure is an updated figure we had in the 1.0 rec, and landed in this document through a comment of Michael Hausenblas. But this was _before_ the radical change on the behaviour of @property. I wonder whether keeping it in the document is actually o.k.: it gives the mistaken impression that this is _the only_ behavioural view of @property which is way off base these days. Ie, we may be better off removing the figure altogether.
>>> 
>>> Ivan
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Jan 25, 2012, at 11:01 , Ivan Herman wrote:
>>> 
>>>> So, an interesting situation... There are two comments on the figure on @property->literal evaluation:
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> - Niklas says:
>>>> 
>>>> The image with caption "Literal object resolution" is too big,
>>>> causing scrollbars to appear.
>>>> 
>>>> - Manu says:
>>>> 
>>>> The image is too small to make out what it says.
>>>> 
>>>> The two comments cancel each other out... I am not sure what I should do, if anything.
>>>> 
>>>> Ivan
>>>> 
>>>> ----
>>>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
>>>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
>>>> mobile: +31-641044153
>>>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> ----
>>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
>>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
>>> mobile: +31-641044153
>>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
>> 
>> ----
>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
>> mobile: +31-641044153
>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf







Received on Wednesday, 25 January 2012 10:41:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:54 UTC