Re: RDFa generalization - expressing Microformats

I had considered this approach...  but I believe (and am happy to be 
corrected) that each microformat has its own XMDP document that 
describes it, and that a document is going to want to use more than one 
microformat at a time.  In such a case, I don't see how unprefixed 
CURIEs could be correctly mapped to the right vocabulary without some 
sort of registration / discovery mechanism.  Am I missing something here?

As to starting the unprefixed item with '=' in the prefix attribute... I 
don't hate that.  I had considered that too.  It just seemed ugly and 
not really necessary.  Doesn't matter to me.

Toby A Inkster wrote:
>
>> <body prefix="uf=http://microformats.org/vocab#">
>>
>> <div typeof="haudio">
>>    <span property="title">Start Wearing Purple</span> by
>>    <span property="contributor">Gogol Bordello</span>
>>    <span property="published" content="20020514">May 14th, 2002</span>
>> </div>
>>
>> </body>
>
> Why not just use something like this:
>
>     prefix="=http://microformats.org/vocab#"
>
> (Yes, that value intentionally starts with an equals sign.) That way 
> you're saying that all unprefixes values come from that vocab - there 
> is no need for the vocab document to define all those "xhv:reserved" 
> triples.
>
> ...
>
> That way the RDFa parser has no need to download and parse the 
> vocabulary document. Instead it uses the simple rule that all 
> unprefixed terms belong to the default prefix, and the default prefix 
> may be defined in the same way as other prefixes using 
> prefix="pfx=uri" but by having "pfx" set to the empty string. If no 
> default prefix is defined, then a default default prefix of 
> <http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#> is assumed.
>

-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com

Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2008 13:39:18 UTC