- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Thu, 01 Apr 2010 18:41:02 -0500
- To: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
(with my PFWG hat on) Part of the work in the PFWG is the creation of the Role Attribute Specification. This is a simple specification that defines an attribute that can be used to clearly identify the (machine interpretable) role of an element (e.g., role='banner', role='spinbutton'). A number of roles are defined in the XHTML vocabulary, but the role attribute's datatype is ( TERM | URIorCURIE )+, and the intention is that this extensible attribute can be used with any vocabulary. Obviously, it would make some sense for @role to be able to generate triples that could be used to help find specific roles in resources. I doubt that spinbutton is particularly interesting, but 'definition', 'contentinfo', and 'main' are probably low hanging fruit for a semantic web inference engine ( <http://example.com/somedocument.html> <xhv:main> <http://example.com/somedocument.html#fragmentID> ). However, we have no real way at this point to allow the addition of new attributes to our processing model. There are no 'hooks' in the Sequence [1]. If there were, a specification like the Role Attribute could say 'When this attribute is used in an RDFa Host Language, its values are interpreted as predicates in processing step N.' or whatever. So, that's the question. Does it make sense to try to introduce this type of hook? If we had one, would we also need a way of indicating (perhaps in a Host Language RDFa Profile document) what attributes hooked in where? Sort of an 'instruction to the RDFa Processor'? Thoughts? [1] http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/drafts/2010/ED-rdfa-core-20100401/#sequence
Received on Thursday, 1 April 2010 23:41:36 UTC