W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > March 2008

Re: Possible solutions for ISSUE 97

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Thu, 20 Mar 2008 09:35:53 -0400
Message-ID: <47E26839.9060203@digitalbazaar.com>
To: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org

Mark Birbeck wrote:
> I disagree with you and Ivan, I'm afraid.

I agree with Mark on this issue... more below...

>   (1) we run the RDFa parser on an input document,
>   (*) the output of the RDFa parser is RDF
>   (2) we take the output of the parser and stuff it into a triple store,
>   (3) we SPARQL against the triple store.

My take on it is that the XMLLiteral that we produce has to stand on
it's own... if we don't "stuff" the currently active namespaces into
that literal (or all element tags in the XMLLiteral that we produce)
then we are losing information that an application down the line might need.

Isn't this the problem, or am I not seeing something?

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: RDFa Basics in 8 minutes (video)
http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2008/01/07/rdfa-basics/
Received on Thursday, 20 March 2008 13:36:29 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:01:56 UTC