- From: José Manuel Cantera Fonseca <jmcf@tid.es>
- Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 17:38:23 +0200
- To: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
It is CDATA, but due to the fact that the datatype attribute is set to rdf:resource it is interpreted as a URI by the processor Best regards Shane McCarron escribió: > Just to be clear, are you suggesting that @content now be a URI type > instead of a CDATA type? To date content has been a way of specifying > content for a property when you do not want to use the actual content > of the element in question. I think, anyway. > > José Manuel Cantera Fonseca wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> I'm suggesting the following counterproposal which sounds more >> orthogonal to me and avoids introducing a new attribute: >> >> <div about="http://joost.com/some-film"> >> <div property="dc:title">A film</div> >> <div property="dc:description"> >> Some notes on the film >> </div> >> <span property="dc:subject" content="http://film-vocab/horror" >> datatype="rdf:resource">Category: >> Horror</span> >> </div> >> >> Best wishes >> >> Mark Birbeck escribió: >>> >>> This is a proposal for the requirement at: >>> >>> <http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007May/0018.html> >>> >>> >>> Any discussion about whether this is a legitimate thing to try to do >>> should be added to that thread. This thread is for a possible solution >>> that meets the perceived need. >>> >>> >>> CURRENT SYNTAX >>> >>> There are two current technique for specifying an object that is a >>> resource. They are to use @href on elements that are not anchor tags, >>> and the second is to use a link element. >>> >>> The first, using '@href everywhere': >>> >>> <div about="http://joost.com/some-film"> >>> <div property="dc:title">A film</div> >>> <div property="dc:description"> >>> Some notes on the film >>> </div> >>> <span rel="dc:subject" href="http://film-vocab/horror">Category: >>> Horror</span> >>> </div> >>> >>> There has been some pushback on this technique. >>> >>> The second is to use a link element: >>> >>> <div about="http://joost.com/some-film"> >>> <link rel="dc:subject" href="http://film-vocab/horror" /> >>> <div property="dc:title">A film</div> >>> <div property="dc:description"> >>> Some notes on the film >>> </div> >>> <span>Category: Horror</span> >>> </div> >>> >>> In terms of use in current browsers, we're finding that context >>> information is lost when using 'link' in the body of the document, so >>> this doesn't look like it will work. Obviously the elements could be >>> added to <head> with an @about, but that makes things quite difficult >>> to manage. >>> >>> >>> @HREF EVERYWHERE >>> >>> In my view the idea that authors will be confused by having '@href >>> everywhere' is not as big a problem as has been posed. However, I'm >>> always of the view that if we can find an alternative solution that >>> does as good a job as a solution that people aren't comfortable with, >>> why not just use it. In this case, I think there is an alternative >>> solution that is in some ways better than '@href everywhere'. >>> >>> >>> A SHORT HISTORY OF @RESOURCE >>> >>> In my earliest drafts of RDFa I used attributes for subject, predicate >>> and objects, and the one for objects that were resources was >>> @resource. However, this was never satisfactory, because it meant that >>> information would often be duplicated--once for a clickable link, and >>> once for a statement--and it was the big thing that Ben Adida insisted >>> we should solve. So, after a great deal of juggling things around, I >>> stumbled upon the fact that @rel and @rev could be used on anchor >>> tags--maybe I was the only one who didn't, but I had not known that >>> that--and so it became pretty clear that HTML already gave us what we >>> needed and we could use @href instead of @resource. This seemed to >>> meet Ben's crucial requirement that we should only have to express the >>> URI once, and so 'bridge the clickable and semantic webs'. :) >>> >>> Now, since XHTML 2 had previously added a new feature that @href could >>> be used on any element in a document, to create a navigable link, it >>> seemed obvious that all we had to do was drop @resource, and replace >>> it with @href. >>> >>> However, non-XHTML 2 browsers actually have a tough time turning @href >>> on a span into a clickable link, and although it can be done with some >>> script, we don't get that out of the box. This means that we can have >>> @href attributes in a document that are not clickable links, and there >>> has been some argument that using @href on non-anchor elements could >>> confuse people. >>> >>> >>> PROPOSAL >>> >>> My proposal would therefore be to still _allow_ @href anywhere, but to >>> play this feature down, and point people towards @resource. I feel >>> that an RDFa parser should still process @href as an object that is a >>> resource, wherever it finds it, so that if it encounters an XHTML 2 >>> document, it will still work. >>> >>> But whilst we still _support_ that feature, in our example code, >>> tutorials, and so on, we should instead use the resource attribute to >>> express an object that is a resource. Hopefully this way things will >>> be clearer to authors. >>> >>> One way that we could understand this is that @resource is a core RDFa >>> attribute, whilst @href is not. When we come to use RDFa in a 'host >>> language' we add further rules, and in the case of the host language >>> being HTML or XHTML we can say that @href is given the 'RDFa meaning' >>> of being equivalent to @resource. >>> >>> >>> SYNTAX >>> >>> Our previous example would now become: >>> >>> <div about="http://joost.com/some-film"> >>> <div property="dc:title">A film</div> >>> <div property="dc:description"> >>> Some notes on the film >>> </div> >>> <span rel="dc:subject" resource="http://film-vocab/horror"> >>> Category: Horror >>> </span> >>> </div> >>> >>> (I'll leave how the predicate is expressed out of this, but there are >>> good arguments for using @property here. I'll start a new thread for >>> that.) >>> >>> Regards, >>> >>> Mark >>> >> >> >> >
Received on Thursday, 24 May 2007 15:43:43 UTC