- From: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
- Date: Wed, 8 Aug 2007 11:24:59 +0200
- To: "Manu Sporny" <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- Cc: "RDFa mailing list" <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Hello! > something like this: > > <div instanceof="hmedia:Audio" about="#song"> > <a href="http://www.bitmunk.com/sample/6011101" > rel="hmedia:sample" about="#HREF" property="dc:title"> > A Sample > </a> > </div> > > or in other words, we'd like the following (N3): > > <#song> rdf:type hmedia:Audio; > hmedia:sample <http://www.bitmunk.com/sample/6011101> . > <http://www.bitmunk.com/sample/6011101> dc:title "A Sample" . Absolutely, you can get that (verified with Ivan's pyRdfa) from this: <div about="#song" instanceof="hmedia:Audio"> <a rel="hmedia:sample" href="http://www.bitmunk.com/sample/6011101"> <span property="dc:title">A Sample</span> </a> </div> > Niklas, apologies, as it seems that I didn't state the problem very well > the first time around :) - we'd like something a bit more terse than > what you proposed (even though it did solve the problem I had previously > stated). > > Apologies if this makes no sense, as I'm still coming up to speed with > what is/isn't possible via chaining in RDFa. Can we get the above N3 > without having to use a hmedia:Sample class? NP, I mostly focused on syntactic stuff, not the terseness. As seen in the last example, it's a little more succinct. The extra span doesn't cost much IMHO. First, just a note. You don't need @instanceof really (which is not final yet AFAIK), it is mostly just syntactic sugar for an rdf:type statement. It comes in handy in some places as it also affects chaining (mainly when you want a bnode), but can in general be replaced by a more explicit regular @rel="rdf:type" + resource reference (in a nested element - if used in the same, chaining makes the *type* the chained subject). Also, @class has been voted off - it will not (for now) mean anything in the RDFa sense (which is a good thing in my opinion). Now, the example you give is something that crossed my mind earlier when Ivan mentioned that @property isn't affected by the chaining if on the same element (see <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Jul/0212.html>, and Ben's reply). This was as it has been, so it was just an observation. However, your example here illustrates that it *may* be more intuitive if the rules where changed so that @property has the "corresponding RDF identity" as its subject. I am not at all sure about that though, it definitely could invalidate a lot of other examples/uses. So I recommend the use of a nested span with @property to be certain of getting it right (as right as can be pending recommendation that is). Do any others have thoughts about this? Best regards, Niklas
Received on Wednesday, 8 August 2007 09:25:08 UTC