W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa@w3.org > May 2009

Re: RDFa in <head>

From: Stephane Corlosquet <stephane.corlosquet@deri.org>
Date: Tue, 05 May 2009 13:06:13 +0100
Message-ID: <4A002BB5.2030805@deri.org>
To: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>
CC: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, public-rdfa@w3.org

> My suggestion would be that Drupal should generate a unique identifier
> on the node itself (using @about) since this will then work in any
> context.
Agreed! and that's the approach we've been using on the RDFa prototype 
site at http://drupal.deri.ie/cheese/.
> For example, if I search for items, then each node in the
> search results would have its own @about value, and so be
> self-contained. Similarly, if I use Views to create some new block or
> something, by having @about on each node, everything 'just works'
> within the block.
search results and node titles in blocks remain to be annotated and 
that'll be one of the goals for the sprint next week. Thanks Mark for 
your detailed replies!

Steph.


Mark Birbeck wrote:
> Hi Stephane,
>
>   
>> This brings me to the next topic! In RDF, the URI of a resource should be
>> different from the URI of the page that describes it. I've heard this is not
>> so important with RDFa since the RDF is self contained. Is that right?
>>     
>
> I'm not sure what lies behind this point, but if I understand it
> correctly, I'd have to disagree; ultimately the data is RDF, whether
> carried via RDFa, N3, RDF/XML, or whatever. So we still need to solve
> the same problems, and we still need to ensure that there is no
> confusion between items.
>
>
>   
>> Crafting a URI for a resource described at http://example.com/node/1 is easy
>> by appending #self, #me or #this, and this can be automated. However in the
>> particular case of a blog post for instance, the page and the resource it
>> describes are in fact the same thing. Shouldn't they have the same URI?
>>     
>
> This is where it starts to get esoteric. :)
>
> My suggestion would be that Drupal should generate a unique identifier
> on the node itself (using @about) since this will then work in any
> context. For example, if I search for items, then each node in the
> search results would have its own @about value, and so be
> self-contained. Similarly, if I use Views to create some new block or
> something, by having @about on each node, everything 'just works'
> within the block.
>
> Of course, even in this scenario, you could possibly get away with
> having the same URI for a blog post and the page that carries that
> post, but I'd still advise against it.
>
> By merging the two URIs you are effectively saying that you don't
> envision a scenario where you would like to say things about a blog
> post, independent of the page that carries the post...and as we know
> in software, never say never.
>
> A good example of where things can start to break down comes when
> republishing blog posts (or YouTube videos, or Flickr images, etc.)
> from other sites onto your own site; the subject of the post should
> really refer to the original post's location, and not the URL on the
> republishing site.
>
> In short, I'd say that you can't go wrong if you keep the two
> separate, whilst if you try to cut corners by merging the two URIs,
> you could be storing up problems.
>
> Regards,
>
> Mark
>
>   
Received on Tuesday, 5 May 2009 12:06:53 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:43 UTC