- From: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
- Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 13:51:11 -0800
- To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
- CC: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Manu Sporny wrote:
> You seem to be arguing for the same thing that Mark is arguing for
> (minus @resource and @src):
No, I did not say that: you separated two issues that I believe cannot
be separated, which takes my arguments out of context.
I'm saying that *if* we decide to have @href/@resource completing
hanging @rel (and I'm against it), then I think the logical corollary is
that @instanceof then applies to @href/@resource in those cases, and I'm
worried about the complexity that results from this.
I note that you were recently quite unhappy with the possibility that
@instanceof would apply to @href/@resource (which is reminiscent of my
proposal). Have you changed your mind?
Here's a more complete example:
<div about="#me" rel="foaf:knows">
<div instanceof="foaf:Person" property="foaf:name">
Mark
</div>
</div>
I believe everyone agrees that this gives:
<#me> foaf:knows _:bn0 .
_:bn0 rdf:type foaf:Person .
_:bn0 foaf:name "Mark" .
What happens if I add an @href (or @resource) to the inner div?
<div about="#me" rel="foaf:knows">
<div href="#mark" instanceof="foaf:Person" property="foaf:name">
Mark
</div>
</div>
According to the "@href completes @rel" proposal, that gives:
<#me> foaf:knows <#mark> .
So, what happens to the rdf:type and foaf:name triples? Do they hang on
a bnode that is no longer connected:
_:bn0 rdf:type foaf:Person .
_:bn0 foaf:name "Mark" .
or do they now apply to <#mark>?
<#mark> rdf:type foaf:Person .
<#mark> foaf:name "Mark" .
If they hang on a bnode, then this seems inconsistent: adding the @href
breaks up the graph structure in a way that adding @about at that exact
location does not.
If they hang off <#mark>... now you've got @property using @href from
the same element as its subject.
I'm honestly trying to see it your way, but I think you're arguing based
on the simplest possible markup of a leaf @href. Once you expand the
markup a bit and add some child nodes, it looks anything but "simpler."
-Ben
Received on Monday, 21 January 2008 21:51:21 UTC