- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 13:47:56 +0100
- To: Golda Velez <gv@btucson.com>
- CC: semantic-web@w3.org, ben@adida.net, michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at
- Message-ID: <47CE967C.6050203@w3.org>
Golda, you ask: [[[ Is the use of RDFa in this way with id= properties functioning as the name of the assertion valid? ]]] The answer is no:-(. The current RDFa spec: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax does not make any reference to the 'id' attribute. Nor does it include means to generate named graphs (or reified statements, for that matter) Ivan Golda Velez wrote: > Hello all > > I had a conversation with Eric Neumann of the MIT Simile project, which I left > with the (possibly erroneous) impression that I could do this: (if its > wrong, blame me and not Eric! We talked in general terms, not this specific) > > <html xmlns:cal="http://www.w3.org/202/12/cal/ical#' > xmlns:tld="/http://www.eyrie.org/~zednenem/2002/web-threads#> > > <span id="tucsonrodeo08" about="#tucsonrodeo08"> > <span property="cal:summary"> > bull riding, calf roping, barrel racing and other fun cowboy stuff > </span> > <span property="cal:dtstart" content="20080222T1300+0200"> > you missed it - it was Feb 22-25 2008 > </span> > <span id="opinion1" property="tdl:Post"> > no animals were harmed in this rodeo > </span> > </span> > > <span about="#opinion1"> > <span id="opinion2" property="tdl:discusses"> > I was at the rodeo 2/23/08 and did not see any animals harmed, though the > goat used in the kid section at 2PM was thrown down pretty hard a few times. > <!-- this observation itself could be more structured, but that's not the > point here --> > </span> > </span> > > </html> > > If we use some kind of modified n3 notation is this what we get? (for the > discussion part) > > @prefix : <the address of the page containing the above> > > #opinion1: #tucsonrodeo08 tdl:Post "the rodeo..." > > #opinion2: #opinion1 tdl:discusses "I was at..." > > I realize that you could already use TDL notation to have a threaded > discussion, but it seems to me that by being able to refer precisely to a > specific RDF statement that then adds the ability to relate this discussion > to other structured data (the rodeo that occurred on Feb 23 at a specific > location). > > The general idea of whether animals are hamed at rodeos can lead to endless > general discussion. But being able to tie specific instances to the > discussion in a machine-readable way may make the discussions more useful for > later analysis of the subject. This same type of discussions tied to > specific events and testimony would be useful in the medical field and > others. > > Does this make any sense at all? Is the use of RDFa in this way with id= > properties functioning as the name of the assertion valid? > > thanks! > > --Golda > > > -- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Wednesday, 5 March 2008 12:48:07 UTC