- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2007 17:41:25 +0100
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- CC: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <476BECB5.9030003@w3.org>
Sorry, 'contradiction' is not the right word, I just realized. Contradiction in the sense that the behaviour of @rel and @instanceof becomes very different. Indeed, if I modify the example below, what you seem to say is that the following: <div about="#q" rel="q:r"><div instanceof="a:b"/></div> yields _:x rdf:type a:b. and nothing else. Whereas I would really expect <#q> q:r [ rdf:type a:b ]. :-( Ivan Ivan Herman wrote: > > Manu Sporny wrote: >> Ivan Herman wrote: >>> <div about="#q"><div resource="A" rel="a:b"/></div> >>> >>> which yields >>> >>> <#q> a:b <A> >> Correct. >> >>> or the Bnode from a hanging rel, like >>> >>> <div about="#q" rel="q:r"><div resource="A" rel="a:b"/></div> >>> >>> <#q> q:r [ a:b <A> ]. >> Also, correct (I think)... although, I don't think we have a test case >> for this at the moment. >> > > Well... this is in contradiction with... (see below) > > >>> The behaviour of @instanceof seems to follow the same pattern for most >>> of the cases, but you seem to imply that, somehow, in some cases, an >>> extra BNode is generated for the subject of @instanceof. Can anybody >>> tell me what the result of, say: >>> >>> <div about="#q" rel="q:r"><div instanceof="q:s"/></div> >>> >>> is? My instinct would say >>> >>> <#q> q:r [ rdf:type q:s ]. Manu, you say above >> >From my understanding, which includes Ben's most recent proposal, this >> is the behavior of @instanceof: >> >> 1. Applies to @about or @src if either exist on the current >> element, @about takes precedence over @src. >> 2. Creates a new bnode if there is no @about or @src on the current >> element. >> > > ... THIS! If the @instanceof creates a bnode if there is no @about or > @src, then @instanceof can never be bound to a 'hanging rel', so to say, > ie, to a bnode generated in the parent. I think that is a serious flaw, > in my view; I have been saying that many times now... > > Ivan > >>>>> <div resource="A" instanceof="B" /> >>>> _:x rdf:type B >>> But WHICH _:x are you talking about? A new one just created for the >>> local instanceof? Is it an inherited subject from the parent? >> I'm talking about the new one that was just created for the local >> @instanceof. @instanceof does not inherit anything, ever. >> >>>>> <a href="A" instanceof="B">label</a> >>>> _:x rdf:type B >>>> >>>> Again, I thought we agreed that @instanceof doesn't apply to @href. >>> More exactly: we agreed that, for almost all aspect of the processing, >>> @resource and @href behave in an identical manner. >> Correct! >> >> We talked about Mark's most recent e-mail[1] and it deviates from the >> understanding of the group >> >> -- manu >> >> [1]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Dec/0125.html >> > -- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Friday, 21 December 2007 16:41:20 UTC