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

Re: Microdata to RDF: First Editor's Draft (ACTION-6)

From: Lin Clark <lin.w.clark@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 12:41:49 +0100
Message-ID: <CACho_AvPrWNjcRKzGE_z7YvkdRbR4nzVScrxH0Gjz-f-2g=77A@mail.gmail.com>
To: Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>
Cc: Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>, public-html-data-tf@w3.org, Richard Cyganiak <richard.cyganiak@deri.org>
That's part of the idea that Richard brought up after having thought about
it, and he was the one that suggested that there would be approximately
three patterns.

I assume that one would be hash URIs. I don't know what other patterns he
has identified, if there are any.


On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 12:33 PM, Jeni Tennison <jeni@jenitennison.com>wrote:

> Lin,
> On 14 Oct 2011, at 11:28, Lin Clark wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 9:52 AM, Philip Jägenstedt <philipj@opera.com>
> wrote:
> > This registry could also define a small number of patterns for forming
> the URI from the combination of the itemtype and the token. For example, one
> pattern would be to take the domain, without the path to the itemtype, and
> append the itemprop token as schema.org does. There would probably be
> around 3 patterns. Then, a vocabulary could be registered as following one
> of those patterns.
> What were the other patterns, out of interest?
> Jeni
> --
> Jeni Tennison
> http://www.jenitennison.com

Lin Clark
DERI, NUI Galway <http://www.deri.ie/>

Received on Friday, 14 October 2011 11:42:17 UTC

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