- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Sun, 10 Jun 2012 06:47:12 +0200
- To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
- Cc: Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@inria.fr>, "public-rdf-comments@w3.org" <public-rdf-comments@w3.org>
Gregg, yes, it is fine if tools do that. Some of those integrations are also done by my RDFa distiller, too. But it is another matter if specs *require* to do that. Given that we have, at this moment, three different serializations (with, possibly, JSON-LD joining as 4th) we may get into spec hell. What about the prefix setting in one language, are they all valid in the other? The same for language settings? For base? Are they all mutually compatible (I believe there might be some corner cases)? More importantly, would we require, eg, a Turtle processor to have full RDFa or RDF/XML parsing capabilities? We would open the flood gates if went down that route and I do not believe there that many use cases that would justify that. Again, we are talking about *specs* not about clever tools that may be able to do that if the user so wishes. Cheers Ivan On Jun 9, 2012, at 20:45 , Gregg Kellogg wrote: > On Jun 9, 2012, at 10:46 AM, "Ivan Herman" <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > >> This would be mixing two different serializations of RDF. A similar question to yours would be if one adds an XML literal into Turtle, the XML Literal being RDF/XML. Would the RDF/XML encoded triples be automatically part of the graph defined by the Turtle level? Personally, I believe mixing serializations would not be a good idea in general, ie, the answer would be no. RDFa and RDF/XML are not different in this sense. > > In general, I agree, but I think an HTML source document may be different: > > * it may have a script tag containing turtle, my processor extracts RDF from the turtle and adds to the default graph. > > * it may have embedded RDF/XML, when processing SVG+RDFa I also extract RDF/XML. > > * it may also include microdata, I don't do this now, but processors should probably extract. Both RDFa and microdata from the same document. > > For XMLliteral, and RDFa 1.1 processor will process the content, in addition to emitting the XMLliteral. I think this would be the same for rdf:HTML. > > In general, if a graph has an rdf:HTML literal, it likely comes from an RDFa processor, which would also have processed the contents. > >> Ivan >> >> --- >> Ivan Herman >> Tel:+31 641044153 >> http://www.ivan-herman.net >> >> (Written on mobile, sorry for brevity and misspellings...) >> >> >> >> On 8 Jun 2012, at 17:50, Maxime Lefrançois <maxime.lefrancois@inria.fr> wrote: >> >>> Hello everyone, >>> >>> As the rdf:HTML Datatype has been accepted, one could add RDFa annotations in a rdf:HTML literal value. >>> >>> For instance, let ex:g be a RDF Graph that contains triple >>> >>> ex:x ex:p "<p vocab="http://schema.org/">My name is <span property="name">Manu Sporny</span></p>"^^rdf:HTML . >>> >>> What exactly would be the status of the inner triple? In particular, what RDF Graph would it belong to if any? >>> >>> Kind regards, >>> Maxime Lefrançois >>> Ph.D. Student, INRIA - WIMMICS Team >>> http://maxime-lefrancois.info >>> @Max_Lefrancois >>> >> ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Sunday, 10 June 2012 04:42:54 UTC