- From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
- Date: Sun, 12 Dec 2010 22:46:56 +0000
- To: "Harry Halpin" <hhalpin@w3.org>
- Cc: public-rdfa-wg@w3.org
The following is not an official WG response - just my initial thoughts. On Sun, 12 Dec 2010 19:26:17 -0000 (GMT) "Harry Halpin" <hhalpin@w3.org> wrote: > 1) Remove any reference to @href and @src to the XHTML and HTML5 > documents about using RDFa. They do not really make sense in the > core, as the are obviously specialized for use in making RDFa easier > to use with a certain number of HTML elements, i.e. <a> and <img>. > Having them in RDFa core needlessly complicates the document, and > makes the parsing algorithm much more complicated. It's OK to keep > them in XHTML or HTML5 profiles of RDFa for ease of hand-authoring I > assume, although much of their work can just be done by use of <span> > tags. Removing them from the parsing algorithm in Core would make that parsing algorithm unable to cope with XHTML+RDFa 1.0 as it exists in the wild. @href in particular is especially important, not just in HTML/XHTML hosts, but also in Atom and potentially in SVG. > 2) Please pick either @rel or @property for marking predicates, and > do not encourage the use of both. Without both, how does one express this: <a about="#me" rel="foaf:homepage" href="http://tobyinkster.co.uk/" property="foaf:name">Toby Inkster</a> > Note that OGP already treats @property as something marking out URIs, > not literals, i.e. from [1]: > > <meta property="og:url" > content="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0117500/" /> <meta > property="og:image" > content="http://ia.media-imdb.com/images/rock.jpg" /> I don't see why everyone takes this as an indication that RDFa is too complex. Personally whether OGP were being expressed in Turtle, RDF/XML or some other RDF serialisation, I'd day that the value of og:url should be a literal. Why? Because you're actually talking about the URI itself, not about the resource identified by the URI. og:image is a somewhat more questionable case, but only slightly. > 6) Lastly, as shown by OGP, there's two distinct use-cases for > vocabularies, one where one is talking about the things a web-page is > about, and the other a web-page. Right now RDFa is optimized to talk > about the web-page. This is perhaps something better handled at the RDF layer, by designing vocabularies that fit naturally with RDFa - vocabularies where the most common properties take an information resource as the subject, and either a literal or another information resource as the object. OGP is an example of such a vocabulary, the XHTML vocabulary is another. As a case in point, the xfn:friend-hyperlink property in Richard Cyganiak's port of XFN to RDF. This has a domain and range of foaf:Document. <alice.html> xfn:friend-page <bob.html> . With some rules-based reasoning, you can infer: _:a foaf:page <alice.html> ; xfn:friend _:b . _:b foaf:page <bob.html> . > 8) Also, I can't tell if this is allowed (again, thanks to Kavi for > the example): > > Let's say I have a review about a restaurant. The markup to convey the > relationship is: > <span typeof="abc:Review"> > <span rel="abc:itemReviewed"> > <span typeof="abc:Restaurant"> > > Microdata and microformats both remove one layer of nested html > elements for this scenario. For example in microdata, it is: > > <span itemtype="site.com/Review"> > <span itemprop="itemReviewed" itemscope > itemtype="site.com/Restaurant"> > > And in microformats it would be shorter still: > <span class="hreview"> > <span class="item hrestaurant"> > > Can we just have in RDFa? > > <span typeof="abc:Review"> > <span rel="abc:itemReviewed" typeof="abc:Restaurant"> > > I can't see why not, but not sure what the parsing algorithm does > here. That last sample parses as: _:node1 a abc:Review . _:node2 a abc:Restaurant ; abc:itemReviewed ?x . Where ?x is whatever's described inside that inner <span> element. Why? You can understand it easier if we swap the attributes around... <span typeof="abc:Review"> <span typeof="abc:Restaurant" rel="abc:itemReviewed"> But it can still be reduced to two elements in RDFa, just not the way you've done it: <span typeof="abc:Review" rel="abc:itemReviewed"> <span typeof="abc:Restaurant"> If you don't mind leaving out the rdf:type triple for the the restaurant, you can reduce it to just one element: <span typeof="abc:Review" rel="abc:itemReviewed" resource="_:node1"> Here's a full restaurant review in RDFa 1.1: <div vocab="http://example.com/review#" typeof="Review" property="text" rel="item"> <a typeof="Restaurant" rel="url" href="http://example.net/" property="name" >Il Massimo Tramezzino</a> is great! </div> Two elements. It corresponds to the following six triples in Turtle: @prefix : <http://example.com/review#> . [] a :Review ; :text "Il Massimo Tramezzino is great!" ; :item _:x1 . _:x1 a :Restaurant ; :url <http://example.net/> ; :name "Il Massimo Tramezzino" . -- Toby A Inkster <mailto:mail@tobyinkster.co.uk> <http://tobyinkster.co.uk>
Received on Sunday, 12 December 2010 22:47:32 UTC