W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > August 2009

Re: microdata feedback / Was: Re: Why bound prefixes are an anti-pattern in language design

From: Benjamin Nowack <bnowack@semsol.com>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 11:59:24 +0200
To: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
Cc: public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org
Message-ID: <PM-GA.20090814115924.AD4DA.1.1D@semsol.com>

Hi Dan,

On 14.08.2009 08:31:16, Dan Brickley wrote:
>Do you have an RDF parser for it? Any gotchas for those of us who'd want 
>to consume microdata'd data via RDF, SPARQL etc.? I'd love to see some 
>examples in which much the same basic content is shown in RDFa, in 
>microdata, and then the whole lot loaded into SPARQL/RDF for query...
So far, I've mainly used microdata for injecting items and resource URIs
(via itemprop=about) into tables and forms (I don't think an itemprop on
an input tag can generate triples, though. Would be cool): "Delete table
entry", "update value" etc, where a simple javascript function catches a
click, finds the current item/relation, and sends them to the server. I've
not parsed microdata yet, but an extractor for ARC is on my list. I'd like
to directly compare the different syntaxes, too.

Another thing that I'm looking forward to is comparing not only RDFa and
microdata, but also microformats. With microdata, we get an RDF mapping
for microformats-in-microdata, which we could possibly use as a basis for
parsing old-style microformats as RDF, i.e. the different existing
microformats-to-RDF converters could maybe converge towards a uniform RDF
representation which would then also result from parsing future
microdata-based microformats. 



Benjamin Nowack
Received on Friday, 14 August 2009 10:00:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:02:03 UTC