- From: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2007 18:30:39 +0200
- To: "Ben Adida" <ben@adida.net>
- Cc: "Ivan Herman" <ivan@w3.org>, RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
I agree. Hopefully we won't need this if we have the possibilities of striping with bnode subjects - and list mechanisms - as currently discussed. If the need would arise to denote a bnode, perhaps this shorthand would be nice instead of requiring a throw-away bnode name, that's all. But I as well hope it won't be necessary. Best regards, Niklas On 7/20/07, Ben Adida <ben@adida.net> wrote: > > Ivan, Niklas, > > I'll start replying to the new thread, but I want to point out my strong > preference for not forcing authors to use the [] notation for common use > cases. I don't think we need to, either. > > -Ben > > Ivan Herman wrote: > > > > Niklas Lindström wrote: > >> Hi Ivan, > >> > >> I think I like this suggestion. Just to be clear, wouldn't it be > >> necessary to write: > >> > >> <div about="[_:]"> > >> > > > > I am not sure. Somebody (?) is supposed to write down the RDFa rules for > > these. > > > >> though (and not just @about="_:")? That being the case, *perhaps* > >> @about="[]" could be enough? Although it may not be symmetrical enough > > > > Yes, if you are right with the one above, than [] could also work... > > > > Let us wait for the exact write up of the RDFa rules for URI > > abbreviation (/me avoid using the "C" word...) > > > > Ivan > > > >> or even look broken.. Sure it looks exactly the way blank nodes are > >> expressed in Notation 3. But that may be unfortunate of course, since > >> it would suggest that you could use N3 in the attribute value (which > >> naturally isn't the case at all). That said, it does look succinct and > >> "clean" in my eyes.. Though "_:" (within square brackets in "plain > >> URI" attributes like @about) may be more consequential I guess. > >> > >> Best regards, > >> Niklas > >> > >> > >> > >> On 7/18/07, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > >>> Some of the issues in the past days made me thing a bit. I refer here to > >>> issues like > >>> > >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Jul/0143.html > >>> > >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Jul/0136.html > >>> > >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Jul/0137.html > >>> > >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Jul/0142.html > >>> > >>> > >>> One of the problems we are fighting with is when to generate a new blank > >>> node and how... > >>> > >>> I guess we will have something special for about values along the lines > >>> of turtle for blank nodes, right? about="_:blabla" means a blank node > >>> with nodeId (to use the RDF/XML terminology) "blabla". But what is the > >>> meaning of about="_:". Well, mentally, I could say that this means a > >>> blank node hose nodeId I do not care about, just let the system choose > >>> whatever this wants. > >>> > >>> What this means is that if I say > >>> > >>> <div property="a:b" about="_:">blabla</div> > >>> > >>> that would yield > >>> > >>> [ a:b "blabla" ] > >>> > >>> Or, if there are more things in <div> the blank node would act as a > >>> common subject, because the same rules for @about would apply. > >>> > >>> In > >>> > >>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Jul/0137.html > >>> > >>> > >>> Mark proposed that > >>> > >>> <div instanceof="foaf:Person"> > >>> ... > >>> </div> > >>> > >>> would automatically create a blank node and instanceof would apply to > >>> that. In fact, we could say that the real code here is: > >>> > >>> > >>> <div instanceof="foaf:Person" about="_:"> > >>> ... > >>> </div> > >>> > >>> in which case the rule from Mark simply come from our usual rules, > >>> without any exception to instanceof (compared to the usage of @rel, ie, > >>> to what the attribute applies to). > >>> > >>> The other issue was to create a list of anonymous blank nodes. Well > >>> > >>> <ul instanceof="rdf:List"> > >>> <li about="_:" instanceof="foaf:Person" property="foaf:name">A</li> > >>> <li about="_:" instanceof="foaf:Person" property="foaf:name">B</li> > >>> </ul> > >>> > >>> would exactly do it. Note that if of the authors have his/her own > >>> resource, than > >>> > >>> <ul instanceof="rdf:List"> > >>> <li about="_:" instanceof="foaf:Person" property="foaf:name">A</li> > >>> <li about="http://www.a.b.c" instanceof="foaf:Person" > >>> property="foaf:name">B</li> > >>> </ul> > >>> > >>> would of course do it, and keep it very symmetrical. > >>> > >>> We already have a rule on the creation of 'empty' nodes, ie > >>> > >>> <div rel="a:b">....</div> > >>> > >>> means setting a new blank node. We could keep that rule, too, I do not > >>> think it would lead to any harm... > >>> > >>> This is really just an uncooked idea, may be absolute rubbish. But maybe > >>> it is worth looking at it... > >>> > >>> Ivan > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> > >>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead > >>> URL: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > >>> PGP Key: http://www.cwi.nl/%7Eivan/AboutMe/pgpkey.html > >>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf > >>> > >>> > > > >
Received on Friday, 20 July 2007 16:30:52 UTC