On Jan 1, 2013, at 8:24 PM, "Adam Sobieski" <adamsobieski@hotmail.com<mailto:adamsobieski@hotmail.com>> wrote: RDFa Working Group, Gregg Kellogg, Greetings. If RDF collections are archaic then there might be a need for one or more new ontologies for use across digital documents (http://ceur-ws.org/Vol-216/submission_12.pdf, http://code.google.com/p/collections-ontology/, http://purl.org/co, http://www.w3.org/TR/SMIL/smil-timing.html#q49). I disagree that reification is archaic. Reification can enhance RDFa expressiveness and there are syntactic possiblities, syntactic sugar, for reification with RDFa (http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-core/#s_model, http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-core/#s_rdfaindetail). Comments on RDF features such as Containers and reification should be directed to rdf-comments@w3.org<mailto:rdf-comments@w3.org>. This group concerns itself with serializing RDF in HTML, not the core concepts. Gregg What is the status of the RDF API (http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-api/) and of the RDFa API (http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-api/)? Kind regards, Adam
Received on Wednesday, 2 January 2013 04:44:45 UTC