- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 01:37:12 +0000
- To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Cc: info@weborganics.co.uk, W3C RDFa task force <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
On 21 Mar 2008, at 01:21, Karl Dubost wrote: > > > Le 21 mars 2008 à 06:00, Martin McEvoy a écrit : >> how about "classof" >> >> <div rel="foaf:made"> >> <a classof="foaf:Document" href="http://example.com/"> >> <span property="dc:title">My Example</span> >> </a> >> </div> > > kind, occurenceof, category, genre, family, group > > "typeof", "classof" are appealing but too close from "type" and > "class". Easy to make a mistake and take the other one when you > don't know If 'type' and 'class' are taken and unusable, ... then I'm liking 'kind' (and 'typeof' is ok). 'kind' is a nice, generous, positive word :) I'm not sure it entirely fits here. But my intuitions are some what screwed up by too many years of RDF. Would be good to get input from un-polluted Web devs... cheers Dan
Received on Friday, 21 March 2008 01:37:50 UTC