W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-data-tf@w3.org > October 2011

Mapping Microdata to RDF

From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
Date: Sat, 8 Oct 2011 03:22:49 -0400
To: "public-html-data-tf@w3.org" <public-html-data-tf@w3.org>
Message-ID: <FADC6E0C-CF30-48B1-B89B-ACD84F1B983C@greggkellogg.net>
I created a straw-man proposal for mapping Microdata to RDF [1]. Note that my Wiki-fu is not great, and any help in improving formatting, particularly for definition lists containing other definition lists, would be helpful.

Step 1.1 adds a base URI rule not in the original spec, but I believe it is correct none the less.
Steps 1.2-1.5 are pretty much from the 2001-05-25 version of the Microdata spec [2], with some editorial comments indicating that I think we should consider eliminating them.
Step 1.6-1.8 are a new interpretation of the original steps for transforming @itemscope based items to RDF with changes reflecting what I believe is the current thinking, including allowing for multiple @itemtype values, deriving the @itemprop token URIs from the first @itemtype value, and placing multiple values of a single property in an RDF Collection (list).

I have not attempted to describe additional semantics for undefined attributes, such as proposed @itemvocab or @itemvaltype, but these could be added fairly easily.

I think we should consider placing this in a ReSpec document rather than keeping it on the Wiki, as ReSpec is much better for formatting such procedures.

My own Ruby implementation [3] has been updated (on GitHub, not yet released) to comply with these rules and passes my own test suite, which I'd be happy to try to turn into a standard W3C test suite, similar to that defined by Turtle.


[1] http://www.w3.org/wiki/Mapping_Microdata_to_RDF
[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2011/WD-microdata-20110525
[3] https://github.com/gkellogg/rdf-microdata
Received on Saturday, 8 October 2011 07:23:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:08:24 UTC