- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 01 Jun 2005 07:47:09 -0500
- To: Danny Ayers <danny.ayers@gmail.com>
- Cc: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 13:29 +0200, Danny Ayers wrote: > Just out of curiosity, has anyone played with expressing plain (X)HTML > docs in RDF? When the infoset stuff was in progress, there was some effort at expressing it in RDF; it wasn't really finished/standardized, but we have... An RDF Schema for the XML Information Set W3C Note 6 April 2001 http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-infoset-rdfs That model is pretty weak; it was just crying out for cardinality constraints and such; when DAML+OIL came around, I did... A DAML+OIL model of the XML Information Set (in progress May 2001) http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/infoset/ esp http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/infoset/infoset-daml.n3 and culminating in... http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/infoset/infoset-diagram.png Googlingn around, you can see various bits of related work... Infoset representations in HTML and RDF http://www.stylusstudio.com/xmldev/200108/post70770.html XML Infoset, RDF and Data Modelling http://www.mnot.net/blog/2004/05/28/other_data_models > Might it be useful for anything - annotations?, editor > building? Stuff maybe like: > > <body> > <p>some text</p> > </body> > > => > > xhtml:body x:hasChild _:p1 . > _:p1 rdf:type xhtml:p . > _:p1 rdf:value "some text" . TimBL's approach was... http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/xml2infoset.py (there are probably some examples of how to use that around, but I don't remember where they are). > I don't know if there's any best practice/convention for fairly > arbitary tree containership. Combined with a Collection to preserve > doc order? Presumably attributes would have to get > namespace-qualified equivalents. > > Or would this just be a clunky version of what XPath/XPointer already offers? Quite possibly; see... New XML and XPath built-ins for CWM Waleed Abdulla (Thursday, 12 May) http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-cwm-talk/2005AprJun/0006.html > > (I've not really been following the XHTML 2.0 developments, maybe > that's generally more amenable to RDFization). > > Cheers, > Danny. > -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/ D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541 0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E
Received on Wednesday, 1 June 2005 12:47:14 UTC