- From: Ennals, Robert <robert.ennals@intel.com>
- Date: Sat, 12 Dec 2009 01:15:08 +0000
- To: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- CC: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>
[snip]
> I *think* typeof="" should quickly and easily accomplish the feat of
> creating a blank node without giving it a name or type, or using
> chaining, but the current RDFa spec is a little unclear in that regard.
> Hopefully RDFa 1.1 will clarify this particular case, as I do think
> it's a useful pattern.
Ah. I hadn't realized that was legal. A quick play with the w3 online RDFa Distiller suggests that does indeed work.
[snip]
> > In RDFa I believe I would have to write:
> >
> > <div about="_:bnode" vocab="whatever">
> > <span property="name">Rob</span>
> > <div rel="knows"> -- This node isn't needed in Microdata
> > <div about="_:bnode2">
> > <span property="name">Manu</span>
> > <span property="special-power">RDFa wizardry</span>
> > </div>
> > </div>
>
> In RDFa you could write:
>
> <div about="_:bnode" vocab="whatever">
> <span property="name">Rob</span>
> <div rel="knows">
> <span property="name">Manu</span>
> <span property="special-power">RDFa wizardry</span>
> </div>
> </div>
>
> No extra node.
You are indeed right.
I think the reason I missed that was because, when I'd been playing around with RDFa, I'd been putting @typeof on all my nodes. Rather confusingly, if I write your example with @typeof:
<div about="_:bnode" vocab="whatever">
<span property="name">Rob</span>
<div rel="knows" typeof="Person">
<span property="name">Manu</span>
<span property="special-power">RDFa wizardry</span>
</div>
</div>
... then it doesn't work, the link between me and Manu isn't made, and we need the indirection node again.
RDFa makes my head hurt...
-Rob
Received on Saturday, 12 December 2009 01:15:48 UTC