- From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com>
- Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 13:10:43 +0000
- To: "Ben Adida" <ben@adida.net>
- Cc: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Hi Ben, Shane has pointed out to me that I completely missed the core of this proposal. When we discussed using @src as a subject on the telecon [1], I was quite happy with it because it actually 'already worked' on the chaining rules I had proposed. But of course I wasn't listening carefully enough. :( I didn't realise that the suggestion was to remove the ability for @src to express an object, and replace it with being a subject. > As per my action item from last week, here are some thoughts on @src > given the new chaining rules. > > PROPOSAL: @src defines a subject, not an object. @about overrides @src > in the same way that @resource overrides @href. My idea was that @src defines a subject when there is no @rel, but can still define an object. Note the example I pasted into the meeting log: <markbirbeck_> Would be interesting to know if Ivan would be happy with: <markbirbeck_> <div about="#a" rel="a:b"> <markbirbeck_> <img src="http://a.b.c" instanceof="w:p"/> <markbirbeck_> </div> Which is what we've ended up with. But what I was trying to stress was the lack of a @rel with @src; I wasn't trying to suggest that we drop the whole formulation of @src being a subject. > Arguments: > > 0) Given that an image is inline, it would be quite odd not to be able > to declare an @instanceof on that image using simply: > > <img src="foo.jpg" instanceof="foaf:Image" /> Agreed. As with @about, this sets a subject. But due to chaining rules, it may not be *only* a subject, and it may also set an object: <div about="#ben" rel="foaf:depiction"> <img src="foo.jpg" instanceof="foaf:Image" /> </div> The point I'm keen to keep stressing is that once you adopt the notion of chaining, then attributes are able to be subjects, objects or both, depending on context. > 1) Having three different ways to specify an object, @resource, @href, > and @src is probably a sign of bad design. I don't agree. :) That would imply that anything more than the attributes @subject, @predicate and @object is bad design. ;) > 2) Declaring a foaf:img is trivial with the new chaining rules, even > when @src is the subject: > > <div about="#me" rel="foaf:img"> > <img src="foo.jpg" instanceof="foaf:Image" /> > </div> Right, that's agreed. But what about this: <img about="#me" rel="foaf:img" src="foo.jpg" /> I don't see why we don't retain support for that. The presence of @rel is what turns some of the attributes into objects. > 3) Using @about to override @src allows for just the kinds of situations > where the rendered does not quite match the semantic: e.g. you used a > thumbnail picture but you want to declare a semantic relationship with > the full-size image. Ok. > 4) Ivan is happy :) > > > Okay, I could come up with more, but I'll just say that, given the clean > design of Mark's chaining rules, the @src-as-subject proposal just makes > sense in my mind. And I apologise for not spotting this before...but I thought we were going for the "@src-as-subject-or-object proposal". Regards, Mark [1] <http://www.w3.org/2007/12/13-rdfa-minutes.html#action12> -- Mark Birbeck, formsPlayer mark.birbeck@formsPlayer.com | +44 (0) 20 7689 9232 http://www.formsPlayer.com | http://internet-apps.blogspot.com standards. innovation.
Received on Monday, 7 January 2008 13:10:49 UTC