Re: Identification of RDFa content

Will RDFa ever work on HTML4? What would we do in the scenario?

-Elias

Ben Adida wrote:
> 
> Ivan,
> 
> Sorry for the delayed response here.
> 
> RDFa is meant to be a natural part of XHTML. In other words, declaring a
> document to be XHTML 1.2 or 2.0 is enough to make a parser look for
> RDFa. This may be done by specifying a GRDDL profile in the XHTML 1.2
> and 2.0 namespace documents.
> 
> Of course, parsers may choose to be more promiscuous than that and look
> inside XHTML 1.1 and 1.0 if they so choose...
> 
> -Ben
> 
> Ivan Herman wrote:
>> This may have been discussed before, in which case apologies. I have not
>> seen a reference to it in the latest draft.
>>
>> The question: how does one discover that an XHTML file is 'RDFa-d'? The
>> issue stroke me as a result of some discussions lately around the
>> Tabulator[1] and Chris Bizer's announcement[2]. In both cases one can
>> see engines that are able to make an indirect step, so to say; ie, they
>> get a URI to a traditional site, but they can deduce the presence of a
>> corresponding RDF data which they can add to their graph they build and
>> explore. Examples are the <link references to RDF data, or the GRDDL
>> profile.
>>
>> Hence the question again: how does an automatic procedure 'know' that an
>> XHTML file contains RDFa encoded extra RDF data? Of course, a processor
>> could RDFa process *all* XHTML file it gets hold of, but it may be worth
>> adding some standard notification. Also, if such identification was
>> around, the same URI could be used both for human consumption and for an
>> RDFa-aware RDF environment.
>>
>> One would think of a profile attribute or is some sort of a special and
>> predefined <link>... whichever. Something would be good.
>>
>> Any thoughts?
>>
>> Ivan
>>
>>
>> [1] http://dig.csail.mit.edu/breadcrumbs/node/165
>> [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2006Oct/0065.html
>>
> 
> 
>

Received on Wednesday, 22 November 2006 23:16:24 UTC