- From: Charles McCathieNevile <charles@sidar.org>
- Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 16:10:26 +0200
- To: "Chris Ridpath" <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca>, public-wai-ert@w3.org
On Wed, 27 Apr 2005 12:50:41 +0200, Chris Ridpath <chris.ridpath@utoronto.ca> wrote: >> This seems feasible to me,except that on the call I think we went in >> the directionof definig a class earl:Location (instead of earl:thing in >> yur code). >> > I've modified the "location" from my previous example so it looks like > this: You have used the class Location, not the property (this is why I think they should have distinct names) so this isn't rdfs-valid RDF. But otherwise it would be fine. > <earl:Location> > <rdf:Bag> > <rdf:li rdf:parseType="Resource"> > <dc:title>anchor</dc:title> ... > > I've added a title to describe what the things are instead of using the > rdf:about attribute as you suggested. It's valid RDF and I think it > means the same as what you suggested. It means something very different. the rdf:about means you have a URI for the statement, so you can make further descriptions somewhere else. The title provides some human-readable text describing a resource. (By the way, whenever you have a plain text value you should language tag it with xml:lang). > In this example I need to store info about the anchor and the link text > because the accessibility test requires that the link text describe the > link destination. > > I've created 2 new earl elements called earl:md5 and earl:text but I > don't think this is quite right. We're going to need more of these > things but I'm not sure how to put them in the location properly. You need to decide if they are properties or classes (I think you have correctly used them as properties here). This comes back to the question of whether we want to create a huge list of context things, or if we want to create a simple mechanism for defining them, like the one I described earlier (label, value). The benefit of doing the latter is that tools at least know they are getting some kind of element type. (The alternative is to define things as subProperties). cheers Chaals -- Charles McCathieNevile Fundacion Sidar charles@sidar.org +61 409 134 136 http://www.sidar.org
Received on Sunday, 1 May 2005 14:10:49 UTC