- From: Reto Bachmann-Gmür <reto@gmuer.ch>
- Date: Mon, 23 Jan 2006 15:51:42 +0100
- To: "siebeneicher@oaklett.org" <siebeneicher@oaklett.org>
- Cc: semantic-web@w3.org
siebeneicher@oaklett.org wrote: > ... >> Maybe allowing to set the focus on one node in the tree so that this >> nodes the becomes the root of a "forward-tree", as well as a >> "backward-tree" showing the resources which do link to this blog-entry? > > NNS(Navibars Sitemap format) use the map:container and map:embedded > elements to realize exactly this(tree's behind tree's). Navibar do not > have implemented this feature yet, but its a good idea. As you say, > the current Sitemap proposal above does the job with the rdfs:seeAlso > but i would also like to see to include parts of a tree from an other > source. With rdfs:seeAlso the client is encouraged to download the triples from the other source, what is important is that the subject of the rdfs:seeAlso statement is present in the other model as well (and that it can be determined which one it is). > > The idea at the following example was to include a Sitemap from > http://www.osar.ch/eductation-sitemap which replaces or extends the > content of the children element. This would help splitting the content > of a Sitemap and gives the chance to include Sitemaps and > Lists(rss/atom ??) from another domains. > > > <SiteMapEntry> > > <rdfs:label>Flight - Asylum - Integration</rdfs:label> > > <page rdf:resource="http://www.osar.ch/education" /> > > <children rdf:parseType="Collection" > rdfs:seeAlso="http://www.osar.ch/eductation-sitemap" /> > > </SiteMapEntry> > > The rdfs:seeAlso is not good here, i would use "src" or the atom > ontology, what do you think about this? The rdfs:seeAlso is not good here because it is invalid RDF/XML in that position, it is unclear what you want to be the subject of the rdfs:seeAlso statement (same issue with atom:link). In the example I proposed in my last mail: <SiteMapEntry> <rdfs:label>Flight - Asylum - Integration</rdfs:label> <page rdf:resource="http://www.osar.ch/education" /> <rdfs:seeAlso rdf:resource="http://www.osar.ch/eductation-sitemap" /> <children rdf:parseType="Collection" > ..... </children> </SiteMapEntry> the subject is the SiteMapEntry, however it may be unclear for the consumer, which is the equivalent SiteMapEntry in the model refernced by seeAlso (unless page is an IFP, which conflicts with the requrement that multiple navigattion-maps for the same set of pages should be possible). So I guess the following would be better: <SiteMapEntry> <rdfs:label>Flight - Asylum - Integration</rdfs:label> <page rdf:resource="http://www.osar.ch/education" /> <children rdf:parseType="Collection" > ..... </children> </SiteMapEntry> <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://www.osar.ch/education" > <rdfs:seeAlso rdf:resource="http://www.osar.ch/eductation-sitemap" /> </rdf:Description> > > By the way, the next time i write a spec by my own i will definitly > talk to other about that, it was a big mistake to recommend NNS > without showing the working draft first. A while i ask myself if there > are other ways to distribute/share a new Sitemap Specification because > i am afraid of having the specifications at > http://navibar.oaklett.org/specs/. I am the owner of > http://navibar.oaklett.org but i do not want to own the specification > when it is used by many others out there. Are there ways to give it a > more neutral touch? I have the same problem, and no solution yet. reto
Received on Monday, 23 January 2006 14:52:09 UTC