Re: "role" and inheriting "about"

Than you, Elias,for your reply.

On Fri, 08 Sep 2006 13:39:48 -0400
Elias Torres <elias@torrez.us> wrote:

> > To me, it sounds more natural for the search to stop
> > when a "role" is found on its way.
> 
> It feels like a good thing to do, but I'm not sure is right, if anything
> it needs more discussion in my opinion. Let me explain what I mean:
> 
> <p>
>   <link rel="rdf:type" href="cal:Vevent"/>
>   <span property="cal:summary">...</span>
> </p>
> 
> What should the subject of cal:summary be? If we say to stop at role,
> then should we stop at p's (bnode) as well. The question is whether an
> author adding an rdf:type triple implies it also implies a new subject
> or not.

The Primer says in its last paragraph before 4.4:

"One might now wonder how meta and link behave when their parent element
doesn't have an id or about attribute. The result of such syntax is
an RDF bnode, an advanced topic which we skip in this Prier."

So, I think the subject should be the implicit bnode and 
the author should have meant it.

#I confess I'm not sure if I understand your question (stated in the last sentence).

But I would recommend the author to use @role in this case (without @about in p),
in order not to give an (perhaps) unintended but likely reading that the p element ITSELF
has rdf:type cal:Vevent (,which is strange).

If we have

 <p about="http://schedule.example.org/2006-09#sc1">
   <link rel="rdf:type" href="cal:Vevent"/>
   <span property="cal:summary">...</span>
 </p>

it is clear the subject being the thing referenced by the URI, though.

Best,
Yoshio
fukushige.yoshio@jp.panasonic.com

-- 
Yoshio Fukushige <fukushige.yoshio@jp.panasonic.com>
Network Development Center,
Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd.

Received on Monday, 11 September 2006 07:24:48 UTC