semantics of @role a.k.a. xh:role [was: Re: [RDFa] The CLASS attribute

At 11:39 AM -0500 14 02 2007, Ben Adida wrote:
>Al Gilman wrote:
>>  In WAI-ARIA we *are* as of now using @role for things that have
>>  reference explanations that are accessible by QName.  But this is
>>  really because we took what HTML WG offered us as their choice;
>>  not because we did a conclusive, independent analysis of where to put
>>  what metadata.
>
>Thanks Al, for these clear points!
>
>No matter what, we agree that there are semantics in @role. Our latest
>proposal is that @role generates the xh:role predicate.

That much sounds great.  The devil is in the details.  Like, what can we
all agree we know and/or should assert about said xh:role predicate?

I just posted a question to semantic-web.  I was puzzled as to where to post
this.  It relates to the interpretation of @role.

http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2007Feb/0136.html

If there's wisdom to bear on that question from the prior discussion here,
some pointers would be great.

In addition to the flowdown question posted there, there is an issue
I have been neglecting. Pardon me for not reading up the history. It
seems to me that WAI-ARIA has an interest in seeing @role have some
bit of a 'workalike' connotation, something like the dictionary
definition of 'equivalent,' which entails comparability _of
outcomes_. Not just rdf:type nor quite so broad as skos:related.
Sensibly similar in an outcomes-focused view.

Hard enough to get people to consense on the right fuzzy notion.  But it's
still tempting to look on this as an opportunity for RDF that makes assertions
about xh:role in, say, the xsd:appinfo in the Role module spec.

Al



>-Ben

Received on Thursday, 22 February 2007 19:24:56 UTC