W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > August 2011

Re: Spec update with vocabulary expansion

From: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2011 16:04:05 -0400
To: public-rdfa-wg WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <5DC55284-C479-44DD-B5BB-C646975E2CC6@greggkellogg.net>
I just finished implementing @vocab expansion in my processor and came across a couple of things we might consider adding to the spec:

For my own testing, I used DOAP as the @vocab value, which returns an RDF/XML representation of the vocabulary. Without having an RDF/XML processor also loaded, this results in a load error, but many other things could result in an error. I elected to add a rdfa:UnresovedVocabulary warning to the processor graph in this case.

To appendix B.2, add:

rdfa:UnresolvedVocabulary a rdfs:Class, owl:Class;
  dc:description "warning; to be used when a referenced vocabulary fails to load" .

Also, rules rdfs5 and rdfs11 don't add interesting information to the default graph; they're only useful as rules to expand of subClass/subProperty chains. I place these in a separate context (t-box). There's no harm in adding them to the default graph, but we should consider adding wording that allows these triples to be removed from the default graph might be useful as a note.

To 10.1 Details of the RDFa Vocabulary Expansion, change:

The processor SHOULD NOT add the triples appearing in the vocabulary graph to the (expanded) default graph.


The processor SHOULD NOT add the triples appearing in the vocabulary graph, or created as the result of expanding rules rdfs5 and rdfs11 to the (expanded) default graph.

We also need to discuss how we should add tests to the RDFa Test Suite, wether as "optional" tests in the main manifest, or as a completely separate manifest and test suite.

Received on Wednesday, 31 August 2011 20:04:42 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:05:26 UTC