- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 18:55:45 +0100
- To: Golda Velez <gv@btucson.com>
- CC: semantic-web@w3.org, ben@adida.net, michael.hausenblas@joanneum.at
- Message-ID: <47CEDEA1.7060609@w3.org>
Golda, I must apologize, my mail was not really clear. The issue is not 'id' or 'name'. In RDFa, you can of course put any valid URI into the @about, and that can be a relative URI within the document. The point is: that will not generate things like: #opinion1: #tucsonrodeo08 tdl:Post "the rodeo..." Ivan Golda Velez wrote: > Hm. Too bad. What about using the old style > > <A NAME="statement_identifier"> </A> > > to wrap the statement in? Then > > "#statement_identifier" > > is a valid URI by standard addressing rules > > --G > > On Wednesday 05 March 2008 5:47, Ivan Herman wrote: >> 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 >> > -- 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 17:55:57 UTC