- From: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 29 Oct 2012 20:12:38 +0100
- To: Karl Fritsche <karl.fritsche@cocomore.com>
- Cc: public-multilingualweb-lt@w3.org
- Message-ID: <CAL58czp+s9Bhxk0fVxOe_abKQ3r2TPA1oXJMJdOqNF8tdM+hdg@mail.gmail.com>
Thanks a lot for this, Karl. I tried to implement the changes, please have a look. Best, Felix 2012/10/29 Karl Fritsche <karl.fritsche@cocomore.com> > Hi all, > > only want to point out a minor issue with the HTML+RDFa Example (Example > 55) in disambiguation. > > - the <link>-tag to the its rules are missing > - is the ITS-prefix in the <body> needed? > - I think the property should be http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name**, > because the default RDFa NS (http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/**vocab#<http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#>) > has no name property and another @vocab is not defined > - in my mind in this example resource should be replaced with about, > because dbpedia:Dublin is the subject? > > Cheers, > Karl > > > On 18.10.2012 15:31, Tadej Štajner wrote: > >> Hi Yves, >> >> On 18. 10. 2012 15:08, Yves Savourel wrote: >> >>> Hi Tadej, all, >>> >>> Currently we have: in the global section of disambiguation: >>> >>> - Using disambigSource and disambigIdent to specify the collection and >>> the identifier itself. >>> - Using one of disambigIdentRef, disambigIdentPointer or >>> disambigIdentRefPointer using a URI for the disambiguation target. >>> >>> It seems it should be: >>> >>> - Using disambigSource and one of disambigIdent or disambigIdentPointer >>> to specify the collection and the identifier itself. >>> - Using one of disambigIdentRef or disambigIdentRefPointer using a URI >>> for the disambiguation target. >>> >> I declared disambigIdentPointer since I was going from the ITS1.0 >> patterns, where this was intended to cover the case where one would declare >> the entity within the same document. I don't expect this style to be used >> often. Initially, didn't spot this ambiguity and the resulting side effects >> when we also allow a non-URI identifier. I would say that the second >> version makes more sense. >> >> Sorry, I'm being slow and having a bit of a hard time to understand what >>> combinations of attribute are allowed. My understanding so far was that you >>> could have: >>> >>> - class (and possibly granularity) >>> - and either source+ident or identRef >>> >> >> Type class and granularity are optional. The mutual exclusivity only >> applies with the addressing modes (source + ident* vs. identRef*). Your >> example below is correct - the rules should say that one must use one of >> these two possibilities. >> >> -- Tadej >> >> >>> But the example 53 should a case with no class. >>> >>> The way the global attributes are defined currently is such that the >>> disambiguation rule could have just the selector :) >>> >>> Are the possibilities: >>> >>> - Either source + ident (+ optionally claas) (+ optionally granularity) >>> - Or just identRef (+ optionally claas) (+ optionally granularity) >>> >>> Or some other combinations? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> -yves >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> > > > -- Felix Sasaki DFKI / W3C Fellow
Received on Monday, 29 October 2012 19:13:05 UTC