- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Tue, 23 Oct 2007 11:50:18 -0500
- To: "Hausenblas, Michael" <michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at>
- CC: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>, RDFa mailing list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, SWD Working Group <public-swd-wg@w3.org>
In XHTML M12N we use #s_ for sections, and #a_ for appendices. My opinion is that we can easily extend this to use #A_ for attributes, #E_ for elements, and #P_ for productions. It will scale well. For anything else that might get referenced.... I think it would be a good idea to use the name from closest section heading - assigning a name if there is not one there already (e.g., section 6.2 does not have one right now, but should be "#s_object_resolution") If this works for you all, I will implement it immediately. Hausenblas, Michael wrote: > Shane, > > Thanks for this quick *and* concise reply. I very much > appreciate you doing the hard part of the work ... so let's > see if my 2c are worth it ;) > > Two annotation forms come immediately into my mind: > > 1. An 'attribute-driven' one, where we assign ultra-cool URIs > to according RDFa attributes. > > Example: > Section '9.2.1. The about attribute' would be known as > 'http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#attribute_about' > > or > > 2. A rather RDFish one, where we assign ultra-cool URIs based on > the role an RDFa attribute plays in the generation of a triple. > > Example: > Section '9.2.1. The about attribute' > would be known as 'http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#explicit_subject' > > > Both proposed solutions have pro's and con's - please pick one > (or propose an even more cooler scheme, etc. ;) > > Cheers, > Michael > > ---------------------------------------------------------- > Michael Hausenblas, MSc. > Institute of Information Systems & Information Management > JOANNEUM RESEARCH Forschungsgesellschaft mbH > > http://www.joanneum.at/iis/ > ---------------------------------------------------------- > > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Shane McCarron [mailto:shane@aptest.com] >> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 3:45 PM >> To: Hausenblas, Michael >> Cc: Ben Adida; RDFa mailing list; SWD Working Group >> Subject: Re: [RDFa TC] Update, report, and further actions >> >> >> >> Hausenblas, Michael wrote: >> >>> the ':specificationReference' property will actually >>> point to, e.g., 'http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#sec_9.2.5.' >>> >>> @Shane: Any preferences? >>> >>> >> Yes - don't do that ;-) For each point in the spec that you want to >> reference, please let me know and please suggest the name for a >> permanent ID. Cool URIs don't change, and section numbers can change >> easily. I am happy to annotate the document - just let me know. >> >> -- >> Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 >> Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 >> ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com >> >> >> >> -- Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Tuesday, 23 October 2007 16:51:25 UTC