- From: Jason White <jasonw@ariel.its.unimelb.edu.au>
- Date: Fri, 12 Nov 2004 18:19:04 +1100
- To: Lisa Seeman <lisa@ubaccess.com>
- Cc: Will Pearson <will-pearson@tiscali.co.uk>, wai-xtech@w3.org
Lisa Seeman writes: > Agreed > I was just answering Will question to the same affect, but my setting on > this computer did not make it clear who was replying to what > apologies I bear most of the responsibility here. I knew you were just answering the question along similar lines, and I should have responded to the original message rather than to your reply. > > I would represent it as three triples with a blank node but the point is the > same .It takes more then on triple and is not using the predicate "role" > > Role is just one predicate. and we must be careful not to overload it or it > will become meaningless. Yes. It takes the form: x is an R, where R is the role and x is the subtree to which it applies. > > What i find much mre interesting is that they are now proposing to allow you > to embed RDF using "link" syntax dirctly into XHTML. > > This does not give us any more power, just bits of the power of RDF in a > more useable form. This could be very useful. It also solves the problem of how to include RDF in XHTML. Namespaces are another option.
Received on Friday, 12 November 2004 07:19:55 UTC