- From: Lin Clark <lin.w.clark@gmail.com>
- Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 14:55:36 +0000
- To: Andreas Kuckartz <A.Kuckartz@ping.de>
- Cc: public-html@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CACho_AsbMY8En6skGsPR3v1ya-1a6qqCBc0pKwD88sJQgEpm3A@mail.gmail.com>
Regarding the parser output, I can't speak to what changes have been made in the parser code since I posted that nearly a month ago. Since I pinged a number of people on IRC about it when I was testing (including one of the implementers), posted about it in the Drupal issue, and my email was retweeted and referenced, I expect that it would have been called out earlier if I had been mistaken then. Regarding the Drupal issue... to ensure we're being clear, it was fixed with an override in a module that only 15 sites use. It was NOT fixed in core. That leaves hundreds of thousands of Drupal sites exposing data that was parsed one way when they configured the site, and is now parsed in a different way. As I point out, for my example the Ubiquity RDFa 1.0 parser still returns the data that previously would have been parsed, and it extracts a literal value for the skos:prefLabel value. Please be aware this isn't an effort to discredit RDFa... I am actively working on RDFa support, so I do have an understanding of the differences, some of which advantage RDFa. However, the proponents of RDFa need to be more open and clearer about the very real difficulties that implementers face. I don't think that we do ourselves any favors by glossing over the real problems users are running into. -Lin On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 6:18 AM, Andreas Kuckartz <A.Kuckartz@ping.de>wrote: > I just tried the two different RDF distillers with the RDFa example > pointed to by Lin Clark. > > One result was this: > > --- > @prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> . > @prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> . > @prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> . > > <> dc:subject [ rdfs:label </plain/?q=taxonomy/term/1>; > skos:prefLabel </plain/?q=taxonomy/term/1> ] . > > </plain/?q=taxonomy/term/1> a skos:Concept . > --- > > The other one was that: > > --- > @prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> . > @prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> . > @prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> . > @prefix skos: <http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#> . > > <> dc:subject [ rdfs:label </plain/?q=taxonomy/term/1>; > skos:prefLabel </plain/?q=taxonomy/term/1>] . > > </plain/?q=taxonomy/term/1> a skos:Concept . > --- > > For me that is the same, because the unused prefix rdf does not count. > > The Drupal issue mentioned (http://drupal.org/node/1848464) also was > resolved one day after Lin Clark sent the mail. > > Cheers, > Andreas > --- > > Lin Clark on November 28, 2012, wrote: > > > For example, > > if you parse this test > > page< > http://lin-clark.com/sites/default/files/md-candidaterec-rdfasnippet.html > >with > > RDF > > distiller <http://rdf.greggkellogg.net/distiller> (written by the new > RDFa > > Test Suite author) vs the W3C's distiller > > <http://www.w3.org/2012/pyRdfa>(written by one of the RDFa 1.1 > > editors), you get different results. This > > isn't a theoretical issue, it's an actual issue posted last > > week<http://drupal.org/node/1848464>to the Drupal.org issue queue. > > This puts a strain on data publishers and > > the tool authors (like me) who support them. > -- Lin Clark Drupal Consultant lin-clark.com twitter.com/linclark
Received on Friday, 21 December 2012 05:52:33 UTC