W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-swd-wg@w3.org > July 2007

Re: [RDFa] ISSUE-8: RDF containers in RDFa

From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2007 12:51:48 +0200
Message-ID: <469607C4.8040705@w3.org>
To: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
Cc: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, SWD WG <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
Damn copy paste! :-) Obviously, I meant:

<ul parseType="collection">
   <li>bla bla bla</li>
   <li>bla bla bla</li>


Ivan Herman wrote:
> Ben,
> Unfortunately, your proposal of 2006 has two major deficiencies:
> - it was written with XHML2 in mind, ie, with the <nl> element
> available. That is not the case for HTML4/XHTML1.1:-(
> - there is no reference to collections, only containers. From my
> predominantly RDF point of view:-), I would give a higher priority to
> lists/containers than to collections... (see also my reply to Michael[1])
> In any case, I would like to have a relatively easy way of expressing
> lists in RDFa (I am not yet sure what exactly that should be), and
> possibly leaving the containers aside for a moment. Here are my reasons
> - Expressing Seq/Alt/Bag in a 'pedestrian' way, ie, spelling out the
> structure manually, is not a huge deal. After all, the RDF/XML syntactic
> sugars are really not big deals, just sparing an rdf:type with an extra
> node, plus some trick with the rdf:li. Doing a, say, Seq in RDFa would mean:
> <ul the-attribute-you-shall-not-name="rdf:Seq">
>   <li property="rdf:_1">bla bla bla</li>
>   <li property="rdf:_2">bla bla bla</li>
> </ul>
> referring back to the various issues we discussed in the past few days.
> I simply do not believe it is worth the trouble in RDFa to introduce
> syntactic sugar for this...
> - Expressing collections is, in terms of triples, _much_ nastier,
> unfortunately, though much cleaner in terms of RDF (see[1]). In other
> words, giving a helping hand for RDFa authors in that respect would
> really be good. Unfortunately, the _only_ solution I see at the moment
> is the introduction of a new attribute, much like RDF/XML parseType; ie,
> having something like
> <ul parseType="collection">
>   <li property="rdf:_1">bla bla bla</li>
>   <li property="rdf:_2">bla bla bla</li>
> </ul>
> could then generate a blank node being a list with the <li>-s as
> constituents. _I know_ it is a pain in the butt, but I do not see any
> other solution...
> Ivan
> [1]
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf/2007Jul/0090.html
> Ben Adida wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> There's one syntax issue we haven't talked about n a while that we
>> should probably address in *some* form: how to express RDF containers
>> and/or lists. In particular, how do we indicate a list of creators, or a
>> list of licenses, or a list of authors in a paper.
>> I wrote a proposal on RDFa containers a while ago:
>> http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/BestPractices/HTML/2006-rdfa-containers
>> but that assumed we would do RDF Bags and Sequences. I don't know yet if
>> that's what we should support, or if we should just focus on lists,
>> denoted [a,b,c] in Turtle.
>> Input from anyone, in particular the SWD WG, would be very helpful! I
>> think for XHTML1.1+RDFa, we should do the simplest thing that doesn't
>> completely prevent us from encoding lists of some kind.
>> In terms of implementation, the right direction is likely something
>> using UL, OL, and LI, possibly involving @href/@resource on the LI, as
>> we had expected @href everywhere in the original XHTML2-based proposal.
>> -Ben


Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
URL: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
PGP Key: http://www.cwi.nl/%7Eivan/AboutMe/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf

Received on Thursday, 12 July 2007 10:51:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:31:44 UTC