Re: Some thoughts on the RDFa DOM API document

On 04/26/2010 12:49 PM, Shane McCarron wrote:
>   1. Rather than defer to RDF-CONCEPTS for the definition of a language
>      tag, I think we should refer to IETF BCP 47 - that's what the I18N
>      WG likes people to use these days.

Done.

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-dom-api#rdf-literals

>   2. I assume that the designation of BlankNodes are constant for the
>      lifetime of a specific document instance.  In otherwords, if I
>      process a page and start using it, depending upon blank node names
>      like '_:123' , that designator will refer to the same node at
>      least until the next time the page is processed.  We should make
>      this explicit if it is true.

Done.

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-dom-api#attributes-3

>   3. PlainLiteral and TypedLiteral return both a Node (in element) and
>      the Node contents (in value).  RDFa requires that value of a
>      Literal be extracted in a pretty special way.  We should probably
>      indicate that the 'value' reflects the result of extracting the
>      Literal from the DOM.  In other words, that it is very different
>      than just looking at the content of the Node reflected by element.

Done.

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-dom-api#plain-literals
http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-dom-api#typed-literals

>   4. Rather than defer to RDF-CONCEPTS for the definition of URI, I
>      think we should refer to the IRI (RFC 3987) specification.  The
>      algorithm described in RDF-CONCEPTS is nice, but it could conflict
>      with IRI and IRI is what RDFa Core refers to.

Done.

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-dom-api#iri-references

>   5. I confess that I don't understand the URI Mapping stuff.  In RDFa
>      URI mappings are done in the context of a Node.  It doesn't make
>      any sense to me to have a global mapping class.  I know that
>      people don't generally override the mappings throughout a
>      document, but still... they could, and I don't see what value
>      having global mappings has?

Attempted to explain this a bit more clearly.

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-dom-api/#convenient-iri-mapping

>   6. RDFTriple has a complex constructor definition.  However, what I
>      don't see in there is the ability to use a BlankNode as a
>      predicate.  Within the context of a single document, I think it is
>      perfectly reasonable to define a hybrid type as a BlankNode and
>      then cite it as a predicate for other triples.  Isn't it?

Blank Nodes can't be used as predicates per RDF-CONCEPTS.

>   7. In the RDF Triple Iterator, if I specify a root attribute that is
>      some Node in the tree, and the triples in that hierarchy refer to
>      other triples outside of the hierarchy...  I assume its all fine,
>      but it is not clear to me how I would follow that chain.

We probably need more examples on how to use the RDF Triple Iterator.
Haven't added those examples for the FPWD because I'm not sure what the
best way to do that would be... suggestions are very welcome.

>   8. RDF Triple Projection: First, the title of section 2.7 needs
>      spaces in it to be consistent with the rest of the document.

Done.

http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-dom-api#rdf-projection

>      Second, and this might be a global comment, the use of the RDF
>      term 'object' is confusing when it is comingled with the
>      programming term 'Object' as used in WebIDL.  I don't know how to
>      fix it.  But it is confusing.

It is confusing - I haven't been able to think of an alternative. We are
consistent with the use of "Object" to refer to the JavaScript term and
"object" to refer to the RDF term. Need to find an alternative.

>   9. In section 3.2 and 3.3, the predicate in the various method is
>      limited to a URI.  Can't it also be a bnode (see above)?  Also,
>      and I know this contradicts what I said above about prefix
>      mappings, it would be nice to be able to filter using CURIEs as
>      well as URIs.

Predicates cannot be Blank Nodes per RDF-CONCEPTS.

-- manu

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: PaySwarming Goes Open Source
http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2010/02/01/bitmunk-payswarming/

Received on Thursday, 29 April 2010 05:12:37 UTC