- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2004 13:42:13 +0100
- To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
FYI I reported on our friday telecon to the jena developers' list, and got this off-list reply that has a few review comments of the metamodule in XHTML2; might be useful to the editors. Jeremy -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: XHTML2 heads up on new XML syntax for RDF Date: Mon, 25 Oct 2004 18:30:48 +0100 From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org> To: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com> At 16:50 25/10/04 +0100, you wrote: >latest working draft (metadata section of xhtml2, no RDF explicit) > >http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml2/mod-meta.html#s_metamodule > >As part of the SWBPD WG's RDF-in-HTML task force, I am involved in >reviewing this work. Hi Jeremy, Thanks for pointing this out. I'm not sufficiently engaged with XHTML to properly review this document, but thought I might mention a few points that you can pass on or not as makes sense to you... ... Section 20.2.2: [[ In addition href contains the URI that is being used to uniquely identify the item being related to. For example: ]] and the example makes no mention of href. What is this trying to say? I can't tell. ... I assume there's a good reason to use <link> instead of <meta> for relationship to another resource? [later, I see there is, cf. 20.4] ... Section 20.4: [[ 3. The something that is the author of Crime and Punishment has a property of 'mother tongue' (from the SWAP contacts taxonomy), and the value of that Property is "Russian". ]] Looking at the example, I think the value of that property is "rus" ... Section 20.6: This is potentially confusing/misleading, as RDF distinguishes between them, if it means what I think it means. It also seems to contradict 20.4. [[ Note. When a property specified by a meta element takes a value that is a URI, some authors prefer to specify the meta data via the link element. Thus, the following meta data declaration: <meta property="DC.identifier">http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3236.txt</meta> might also be written: <link rel="DC.identifier" type="text/plain" resource="http://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc3236.txt"/> ]] ... Section 20.6.1: What happens when <meta> specifies xml:lang *and* contains an XML literal? ... Responding to your question, I can imagine this or something like it being a more popular syntax for RDF than RDF/XML. If so, I think it would be good for Jena to support it. Adding RDF to a document raises some questions: Mark's presentation at the tech plenary included "RDF-markup" in the document body as well as the head. This seems to be included in this proposal (though I'm not sure). It might be neat, but tricky, to create markup on body elements when appropriate. ... Regards, #g ------------ Graham Klyne For email: http://www.ninebynine.org/#Contact
Received on Tuesday, 26 October 2004 12:42:48 UTC