- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 09:11:15 +0200
- To: Stéphane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
- Cc: W3C RDFWA WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Stéphane On Sep 9, 2011, at 20:01 , Stéphane Corlosquet wrote: > > > On Fri, Sep 9, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote: > > > > > That's good, I think it illustrates well when prefixes are required (and when vocab alone is enough). Note that the first OGP example with full URIs is not something that will be parsed ok by Facebook afaik. Maybe you could swap og and dc in this particular example, so full URIs are never used for OGP (use full URIs for dc instead)? > > > > In this sense that would not work either, because they only understand prefixes and the first example uses vocab only... > > Oh, right, I overlooked the @vocab. > > > > I read this as an encouragement to using blank nodes. I think we should encourage the use of identifiers and only encourage blank nodes when appropriate. Earlier in the document, some advantages are given for using URIs as opposed to ambiguous tokens like 'title' or 'created'. I think the primer should follow this for data items too. Social networks is a good example where using or reusing URIs for people is good and prevents ambiguity (many social networds provide URIs for profiles, even if not all of them are typed foaf:Person). Or did you purposely leave out the @about to avoid opening the foaf:Person/foaf:Document can of worm, in other words to avoid people from asserting that homepages are foaf:Person's? > > There is that. There is also the issue about typeof defined in a way that it *does* generate those blank nodes and, because it is one of the features that often bites when using RDFa, it is important to node it there. > > Nevertheless: what I did was to remove that 'particularly useful' bit from the comment. I have also added an extra paragraph on the fact that real URIs should be the preferred practice. Does this sound better? > > It does sound better, though I haven't seen the updated version online (I'm assuming you haven't deployed these changes yet). > I have not updated the Overview.src file, I do that only when I reach an equilibrium point. Please look at: http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/sources/rdfa-primer/Overview-src.html > > Another comment: "The rdf vocabulary is located at ." is missing some URI in 4. You Said Something about RDF? > I wonder what happens. The URL seems to fine in the -src, but it went lost in the generated file. Some recspec bug... Thanks Ivan > > Steph. > > > > > > [[[ > > Figure 9: Structrure of Alice’s Site: > > ]]] > > s/Structrure/Structure > > > And oops again... > > > > > > Steph. > > > > > Thanks a lot Stéphane! > > Ivan > > ---- > Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead > Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > mobile: +31-641044153 > PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html > FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf > > > > > > ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Saturday, 10 September 2011 07:11:21 UTC