W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > February 2007

Re: [RDFa] Response to Reviewer Comments on RDFa Primer

From: Antoine Isaac <aisaac@few.vu.nl>
Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 23:40:44 +0100
Message-ID: <45E4B36C.8010704@few.vu.nl>
To: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
CC: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>

Hi Ben,

Some extra comments on the points I raised, it seems I was not 
completely clear (otherwise the other parts of your answer read 
appropriate to me)

>>On abbreviation (removing the span) [perhaps this is not only editorial!]
>>" The span element is actually not required. One can easily add the RDFa 
>>attributes to existing HTML elements, without adding a span:"
>>-> Isn't it only possible when values of abbreviated triples do not have 
>>the same value? (e.g. same dc:creator and dc:publisher)
>Not quite sure what the confusion is here, but the text has been
>clarified as follows:
>"When the existing HTML elements already delineate the exact structure,
>adding a new span element is not required."
I was actually wondering about a situation where you have (with a 
slightly different example)

<h1>Photo Album #12345: Vacation in the South of France</h1>
<h2>created and published by Mark Birbeck</h2>

In this case it seems difficult to me to use your abbreviation (because 
you have two properties, dc:author and dc:publisher, with a same value, 
Mark Birbeck)
So if such an example is now ruled out by your "When the existing HTML 
elements already delineate the exact structure" there is no problem any 
more. But still, this is not trivial...

>>problem of literal and individual-ranged property
>>The value of a dc:creator can be a literal or an individual, therefore 
>>this property can appear as value of both "rel" and "property" 
>>attributes. This seems not problematic but should be acknowledged, not 
>>to make the reader wondering wether this is a bug or a feature.
>"In the above markup and triples, as well as in the rest of the
>document, we slightly abuse the dc:creator  predicate, which is most
>often meant to refer to a person, not just a literal."
I think you did not abuse dc:creator, but I wanted to emphasize that 
both literal values and resources value where possible for it, and 
therefore that both "rel" and "property" could be used for this single 
property, and that the reader should be mentioned this situation, so 
that he does not panic when confronted to these two different cases.


Received on Wednesday, 28 February 2007 07:14:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:01:49 UTC