- From: Leif Halvard Silli <xn--mlform-iua@xn--mlform-iua.no>
- Date: Wed, 18 Aug 2010 03:20:56 +0200
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: Shane P McCarron <shane@aptest.com>, martin@weborganics.co.uk, W3C RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Manu posted a link on Twitter today - where I found this: [1]
]] strange phenomenon in the linked data movement: the almost total
disregard for the linking part. Sure data is getting published
as triples with dereferencable URIs, but where are the links? [[
Be that as it may: support for @cite and @longdesc would at least show
_regard_ for links.
Ivan Herman, Tue, 17 Aug 2010 08:01:05 +0200:
> @longdesc, @alt, @cite, @data, but we could also think
> about @title: all these make sense individually, but each has
> different issues with them. So yes, use cases are important to
> justify the price for each of these.
@price
There are of course implementation costs.
But the price that motivated me to ask for support for @cite and
@longdesc, is the price of illogical gaps in the support of the primary
host language. If RDFa does not support synonymous features of the host
language, then it means that RDFa - in reality and purely for its own
economical reasons, favors certain parts - a simplified version - of
the host language.
It is a shared cost: RDFa becomes less 'native'. While, for the host
language, it may trigger shoehorning (of a@href) instead of using its
specialized features (@longesc + @cite). It also causes duplication of
the content of @alt, @longdesc, @cite, @data into the parallel RDFa
attributes. With the risk of things falling out of sync and so on.
Also: being a "good guy" should not be punished: using <object> because
of its richer alternative text opportunities (compared with <img@alt>)
should preferably not complicate the RDFa tagging. And it would be
logical the use of native semantic features, such s @cite, _simplified_
the RDFa tagging.
It seems to me a bit ironic that RDFa supports embed@src - out of the
box. While when it comes to object@data, then one has to duplicate the
@data URI inside a @about attribute. (However, I admit that supporting
@data requires some thinking, since object is a multifaceted element.)
> I know, Leif referred to
> @longdesc only, but that opens that floodgate I referred to before; I
> cannot justify adding only one attribute and not taking another one
> without proper arguments.
The flood gate really opened when you chose to support @href and @src,
@content and <e>native element content</e> - doing so implicates that
@cite, @longdesc, @data and @alt should also be supported.
> Leif, unless I missed it in your mails (in which case my apologies)
> what you answered were not use cases but more ways of expressing
> @longdesc in triples. What I am looking for is which are the
> applications that become possible with or, say, that cannot be done
> without these extra triples; more precisely, that cannot be done
> easily by the author or an RDFa authoring tool like Drupal
> automatically adding some RDFa attributes alongside (or instead of)
> @longdesc.
'Instead of' is not meaningful. @longdesc is used in order to provide
access, for a human, to a resource - same as @href. I think rather that
one sometimes could consider using @longdesc instead of @resource, once
RDFa supports it. (One should of course not misuse @longdesc - it must
be a "real" and helpful long description.)
> We had some pretty good examples in the past for the
> creation of, say, meaningful foaf files which led to the inclusion of
> @src into the RDFa attribute set, to give an example. This is what I
> thing should accompany any discussion...
Below I try to demonstrate some FOAF use case as well as some other
ones. Are these better?
@data:
foaf:img. Shouldn't all of these work equally well?
<span rel="foaf:img">
<img
src="http://www.formsplayer.com/files/pictures/picture-11.jpg"
alt="Picture of Mark Birbeck" />
</span>
<span rel="foaf:img">
<embed type="image/jpeg"
src="http://www.formsplayer.com/files/pictures/picture-11.jpg"/>
</span>
<span rel="foaf:img">
<object type="image/jpeg"
data="http://www.formsplayer.com/files/pictures/picture-11.jpg">
Picture of Mark Birbeck
</object>
</span>
@alt:
* @alt should count as @content value if you set the @property
attribute on an <img>
* same goes for @alt on an <area> element
* <img src="mother" property="foaf:topic"
alt="My smiling mother" />
instead of
<img src="mother" property="foaf:topic"
alt="My smiling mother"
content="My smiling mother" />
img@longdesc:
foaf:depiction and foaf:depicts. @longdesc is supposed to explain what
those looking at a graphical user agent already can see. Which seems to
circa fit the foaf:depiction use case.
I have here constructed an example with both @longdesc and @alt - I
believe it should be possible to use @longdesc instead of @resource and
@alt instead of @content:
<img xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/"
src="diagram.png"
rel="foaf:depicts"
resource="diagram-data-as-a-table.html"
longdesc="diagram-data-as-a-table.html"
property="foaf:topic"
alt="Development last six months."
content="Development last six months."
/>
iframe@longdesc
foaf:page could be a use case:
<iframe src="feed.atom" title="Our news feed"
rel="foaf:page"
longdesc="about-page-for-the-feed.html"/>
@cite:
Toby had a use case for this. Which made me uncertain with regard to
whether @cite should logically be an @about parallel or a
@resource/@href parallel.
@title:
I have no use cases for @title. And I do not think that adding support
for @cite, @longdesc, @alt or @data require that there is also support
for @title.
My motivation for adding the other attributes, is to make sure that
RDFa doesn't "forget" to implement synonymous features to the ones it
has already implemented.
But for @title, then I see no obvious currently implemented
parallel. Unlike @alt, it it does not have a parallel/synonym feature
in the form of @content or real element content. And unlike @longdesc,
it is no parallel/synonym feature to @href. An unlike @cite, it is no
parallel feature of @src - or @href (again, I became uncertain what the
best parallel is).
There is only few HTML elements where the @title attribute has a
defined function. Right now I recall <abbr>, <acronym>, <iframe>,
<frame>, <style title="*"> and <link rel="stylesheet" title="*">. May
be RDFa should start thinking about those elements first, if some kind
of support for @title is wanted.
[1] http://www.mkbergman.com/902/i-have-yet-to-metadata-i-didnt-like/
--
leif halvard silli
Received on Wednesday, 18 August 2010 01:21:31 UTC