- From: Ed Summers <ehs@pobox.com>
- Date: Thu, 16 Oct 2008 01:40:33 -0400
- To: "Dan Brickley" <danbri@danbri.org>
- Cc: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, "www-tag@w3.org WG" <www-tag@w3.org>
Hi Dan: On Tue, Sep 30, 2008 at 6:50 AM, Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org> wrote: > The document also has an RDF/XML representation available by content > negotiation. While the triples differ a little (Ed - is this a bug?), they > all talk about the SKOS concepts via identifiers that take the main page's > URI and append '#concept'. It is a bug I think. The software developer in me sees the DRY Principle [1] being violated here ... so I'm inclined to drop the rdfa, thus removing the need to keep the rdfa and rdf/xml representations in sync. > Is it TAG-acceptable to use a URI in this manner, when > http://lcsh.info/sh85112589 is the URI for a document available in RDFa > XHTML rather than RDF/XML? What does "http://lcsh.info/sh85112589#concept" > name? How do we 'follow our nose' here? Should the media type definition for > RDFa allow the assignation of URIs to things other than chunks of markup? I finally got around to reading through this thread ... but afterwards I found myself wondering if you saw it come to a satisfying conclusion, or direction forward. //Ed [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRY_code
Received on Thursday, 16 October 2008 05:41:11 UTC