- 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