- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>
- Date: Mon, 15 May 2006 03:28:17 -0400
- To: Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org>
- Cc: public-swbp-wg@w3.org
* Karl Dubost <karl@w3.org> [2006-05-15 16:11+0900] > > Hi, > This is a QA Review comment for "RDF/A Primer 1.0" > http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml-rdfa-primer-20060310/ > Mon, 13 Mar 2006 20:37:46 GMT > 1st WD > > > [[[ > Jo then looks through the FoaF vocabulary, and sees that the pieces > of information that she has in her page%u2014name, phone number and > email address%u2014all have names within FoaF. She therefore adds > those names to her document, using the following approach: > ]]] > > -- RDF/A Primer 1.0 > http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-xhtml-rdfa-primer-20060310/#id67992 > Mon, 13 Mar 2006 20:37:46 GMT > > > Where Jo will find the element of this vocabulary? > Is there a guide with simple explanation for each words and keywords? > A kind of 101 manual. In some sense this is a comment on the readability of the FOAF spec, but more generally (since FOAF is just am example here), perhaps this is a use case for SW vocabulary browsers / instance editors. I'll try to make FOAF spec more readable/skimmable in next rev, ... but I'm not convinced it'll ever be the case that webmasters with no in-depth knowledge of RDF will be able to skim an ontology and know what markup to use, based purely on seeing which terms are defined. What might work is templated examples. Related point while I'm at it. Neither FOAF nor DC's conventional usage employ the XMLLiteral datatype, yet all these RDF/A examples have dc:title and foaf:name taking XMLLiterals. Plain literals are more likely. In fact for FOAF, the schema says: Range: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Literal Also s/FoaF/FOAF/ cheers, Dan ps. see some of you at XTech shortly, can discuss in person...
Received on Monday, 15 May 2006 07:28:25 UTC