- From: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
- Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 18:20:00 +0100
- To: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
- CC: RDFa TF list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Ben, Sorry, I missed the today's telecon. Shame on me. > Here's my proposed alternative: use RDF/OWL for vocabulary mappings, and > add to RDFa only the ability to declare a default prefix. My 2c: though I like the general idea, I have my issues with this proposal. It looks a bit complex to me and might hence hinder adoption due to its complexity. For a better understanding, I have a question - you say: > <div about="#me" prefix="http://myvocab.org/#"> And then > Vocabulary Definition at http://ben.adida.net/vocab, using RDFa: Did I miss anything or how is the 'resolution protocol' thought to work? Cheers, Michael -- Dr. Michael Hausenblas LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway Ireland, Europe Tel. +353 91 495730 http://linkeddata.deri.ie/ http://sw-app.org/about.html > From: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net> > Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 10:03:57 -0700 > To: RDFa TF list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org> > Subject: an alternative for microformat-like simplicity > Resent-From: RDFa TF list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org> > Resent-Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2009 17:04:35 +0000 > > > Hi folks, > > On the call today, we continued discussion of Mark's @token and @profile > proposals: > > http://webbackplane.com/mark-birbeck/blog/2009/04/30/tokenising-the-semantic-w > eb > > I brought up some concerns about the @profile portion of the proposal, > specifically that: > > - this is a vocabulary bundling issue that's being handled at the > parsing level > > - we already have vocabulary mapping features in the RDF/OWL processing > layer. > > > Here's my proposed alternative: use RDF/OWL for vocabulary mappings, and > add to RDFa only the ability to declare a default prefix. > > Markup in the page: > > <div about="#me" prefix="http://myvocab.org/#"> > My name is <span property="name">Ben Adida</span> > > and my email is > > <a rel="email" href="mailto:ben@adida.net"> > ben@adida.net > </a> > </div> > > > Vocabulary Definition at http://ben.adida.net/vocab, using RDFa: > > <div about="#name" typeof="rdf:Property"> > <h4 property="rdfs:label">name</h4>, > which corresponds to > <a rel="owl:sameAs" > href="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name"> > foaf:name > </a>. > </div> > > <div about="#email" typeof="rdf:Property"> > <h4 property="rdfs:label">email</h4>, > which corresponds to > <a rel="owl:sameAs" > href="http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#email"> > sioc:email > </a>. > </div> > > > Thus, an RDFa parser would, without dereferencing anything, be able to > generate the following triples: > > <#me> <http://myvocab.org/#name> "Ben Adida" . > <#me> <http://myvocab.org/#email> <mailto:ben@adida.net> . > > which, through RDF/OWL sameAs inference (only sameAs is needed, nothing > more), would be equivalent to the foaf:name and sioc:email properties. > > The core idea here is that, since this is all about vocabulary mapping > independent of the syntax (RDFa, RDF/XML, etc...), then let's use > existing RDF mechanisms. > > There are some edge cases to consider: > > - what does rel="license" resolve to when @prefix is set? I think the > reserved keywords should trump all, but it's worth a debate. > > - what does rel="foobar" resolve to? I think if you've declared @prefix, > then it is no longer ignored and there should be a foobar property > within that vocabulary, but if there isn't then it's just a dead triple, > very little harm in that. > > -Ben >
Received on Thursday, 16 July 2009 17:20:42 UTC