W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swd-wg@w3.org > July 2007

Re: [RDFa] ISSUE-3: syntactic sugar for rdf:type

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2007 10:52:46 +0200
Message-ID: <46973D5E.1030101@w3.org>
To: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
Cc: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
instanceof is still the closest to the RDF meaning, isa refers back to
the usage in turtle. Although I share Steven's uneasiness about the
two-word thing, they still seem to be the best...

Among the others listed only 'kind' seems to be appropriate. The others
convey some sort of a meaning that rdf:type does not have...

Ivan

Ben Adida wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> In today's telecon, we proposed and resolved to use a *new* attribute,
> rather than @class or @role, for the rdf:type syntactic sugar. Thus,
> @class and @role do not currently result in any triples being generated,
> although one may consider that they will in a future version.
> 
> The question, then, is which attribute to use. Steven expressed
> reservations about two-word attributes like "isa" or "instanceof", and
> instead proposed: denotes, depicts, represents, category, ilk, kind.
> 
> Other thoughts?
> 
> I'm partial to "instanceof" and "kind", and I have no additional
> suggestions.
> 
> -Ben
> 

-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
URL: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
PGP Key: http://www.cwi.nl/%7Eivan/AboutMe/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf


Received on Friday, 13 July 2007 16:45:16 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:17:29 GMT