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

Setting [typed resource] when {@rel | @rev} - RDFa Core 1.1, Section 7.5, Step 6

From: Grant Robertson <grantsr@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2012 22:50:55 -0700
To: <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <A0EC0A88B5744EB1AF478EAB65CFC6D5@grantdesk>
I have been digging pretty deeply into the spec, especially the parts of the
sequence which determine what I call the "Potential Subject/Object"s. These
are the variables [new subject], [current object resource], and the new
[typed resource]. I call them "potential" because (with the possible
exception of [typed resource]) we cannot be certain that the determination
of any one of these will guarantee the generation of a triple. I say
"Subject/Object" because (again, with the possible exception of [typed
resource]) whether any one of them ultimately becomes a subject or an object
in a triple depends on other factors, such as whether {@rel} or {@rev}
(meaning: "whether @rel exists or @rev exists," according to my previously
discussed abbreviations). I lump them together because these are the primary
variables, that we must work to determine within a given evaluation context,
which can then - eventually - become subjects or objects. If you have a
different generic term that you prefer to use to refer to this set of
important variables, please let me know. 

My first question concerns RDFa Core 1.1, Section 7.5, Step 6. This step
discusses how the values of these "Potential Subject/Object" variables are
determined when !{@rel | @rev} (when neither @rel nor @rev exist within the
current evaluation context). The first three lines of the <div
class="explanation"> element (the 2nd through 4th lines of the step as a
whole) have me slightly confused. I will copy them here (with inserted line
numbers) for easier discussion:

====== begin quote =============

1| new subject is set to the resource obtained from the first match from the
following rules:
 |
2|   * by using the resource from @about, if present, obtained according to
the section on CURIE and IRI Processing;
 |
3| if the @typeof attribute is present, set typed resource to new subject.

======= end quote =======

The third line appears to be a continuation of the second line, as indicated
by the semicolon at the end of the second line and the lower-case 'i' at the
beginning of the third. However, the indention of the third line makes it
seem as if it is meant to be considered on par with the first line and the
fourth line (in other words, NOT a continuation of the second line). In
addition, the HTML code shows the third line completely outside the
unordered list element which contains the second line. 

Now, FINALLY, to the actual question:
Is the third line ONLY considered when {@about} (when the @about is present
in the current evaluation context)? In other words, is it the intent of this
portion of the spec to say: 

if {@about} AND {@typeof} then [typed resourse] = [new subject]

... or is it the intent of this portion of the spec to say: 

if {@typeof} then [typed resourse] = [new subject]
   //regardless of {@about}, possibly resulting in [typed resourse] == null



Thanks,
Grant

P.S. I will stop inserting a parenthetical explanation of my abbreviations
after they have been used a few more times. It is a basic technical-writing
rule.
Received on Wednesday, 28 March 2012 05:50:54 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:56 UTC