Re: Locating In EARL Example

Charles, Thanks for the helpful comments.

> The attributes that you have added are not valid. They probably should be 
> modelled as properties - i.e. they could equally be expressed as
>
> <earl:subject r:resource="#subject">
>   <earl:element>img</earl:element>
>   ...
> </earl:subject>
>
OK. All the identifier elements would be children of the earl:subject. What
about using <earl:element> and a number of attributes? Example:
<earl:subject rdf:resource="#subject">
<earl:element name="img" src="rex.jpg"/>
</earl:subject>

and for the xpath expression:
<earl:xpath name="/HTML/BODY/P/IMG"/>

I noticed you're using the "r:resource" element instead of the
"rdf:resource" element. Which one is correct?

> I think it is probably better to think about how this is modelled. One 
> possibility is to think of a subject (a page) and to have a context 
> property (this is what annotea does) that *attempts* to provide a more 
> accurate pointer.
>
This sounds good to me. Whatever we use to identify the thing causing the
accessibility problem is going to be fragile and not very pretty to look at.
However I believe we can create something that will work most of the time
and be useful.

> <earl:subject r:resource="#subject"/>
> <earl:context>
>   <earl:line>9</earl:line>
>   <earl:near r:parseType="Literal">
>   blah blah look at <img src="rex.png"/> if you like that kind of thing
>   </earl:near>
>   <earl:pointer ... >
> </earl:context>
>
Do we need the earl:context element (can't we just put the identifier
elements as children of the earl:subject)?

> You should also be using parseType="Literal" in your message.
>
Is this to be used when including actual bits of the source document? Any
docs to describe its use?

I see you are using an "earl:near" element. Was this just something you are
using in your example or is it something you think we should be using?

Cheers,
Chris

Received on Tuesday, 5 April 2005 05:02:44 UTC