W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > semantic-web@w3.org > January 2010

Re: Last call for feedback before Drupal 7 alpha release

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 10:56:15 -0500
Message-ID: <4B4C9B9F.1090103@digitalbazaar.com>
To: Stephane Corlosquet <scorlosquet@gmail.com>
CC: semantic-web@w3.org, RDFa mailing list <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>, foaf-dev@lists.foaf-project.org, sioc-dev@googlegroups.com
Stephane Corlosquet wrote:
> The first alpha release of Drupal 7 will be created next Friday Jan
> 15th.

Fantastic news Stephane! Congratulations to you and the rest of the
Drupal 7 team... we can't wait to install and use Drupal 7!

Some minor feedback below...

> == RDF mappings ==

The mappings look very reasonable. I agree that Drupal 7 should ship
with a minimum set of RDFa and should allow the community to expand the
vocabularies supported over time. Perhaps after a year or two of usage,
you'll be able to recognize other vocabularies that should be supported
based on module downloads.

> == RDFa markup ==

The markup looks good for the most part. I used Fuzz[1] to view the live
Drupal 7 site in Firefox 3. The markup looks good for the most part,
there were a couple of things that were a bit strange:

=== Repeated Triples ===

Looking at this page:

http://drupalrdf.openspring.net/node/106

There are a number of triples that are duplicated on that page.
Duplicating these triples is fairly harmless, but I wanted to make sure
that this was intended instead of accidental.

<http://drupalrdf.openspring.net/user/2>
   <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
      <http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#User> .

<http://drupalrdf.openspring.net/user/2>
   <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name>
      "John" .

You could keep track of the triples you generate via the code and not
generate duplicate triples. Not sure the added complexity would be worth
it for Drupal, though.

=== Multiple Types ===

Often, comments and posts are marked up with two rdf:types. For example,
this page:

http://drupalrdf.openspring.net/node/106

generates the following triples:

<http://drupalrdf.openspring.net/comment/696#comment-696>
   <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
      <http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#Post> .

<http://drupalrdf.openspring.net/comment/696#comment-696>
   <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
      <http://rdfs.org/sioc/types#Comment> .

Since sioc:Comment is a owl:subClassOf sioc:Post, I don't think there is
a strong reason for you to generate the sioc:Post triple. The same
applies to dc:date and dc:created:

<http://drupalrdf.openspring.net/node/106>
   <http://purl.org/dc/terms/date>
      "2009-01-07T10:58:54-06:00" .

<http://drupalrdf.openspring.net/node/106>
   <http://purl.org/dc/terms/created>
      "2009-01-07T10:58:54-06:00" .

and to blog posts:

<http://drupalrdf.openspring.net/node/106>
   <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
      <http://rdfs.org/sioc/ns#Post> .

<http://drupalrdf.openspring.net/node/106>
   <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
      <http://rdfs.org/sioc/types#BlogPost> .

You may be doing this because there are reasoning agents out there that
don't understand rdfs:subPropertyOf or OWL. Again, just making sure that
this was done on purpose and not by accident.

> I feel uneasy when people ask "How can I see the RDFa?" and
> I can't give them a compelling RDFa parser library which supports 100%
> of the RDFa markup we output.

Have you tried Fuzz[1], yet? There was a new release about a month ago.
The parser passes 100% of the RDFa Test Suite and is a native RDFa
Processor and display UI for Firefox (runs on Windows, Mac OS X and
Linux). The UI is rough, but you should be able to see all of the
triples that are generated.

Drupal 7 is looking great... good luck on the upcoming set of releases!

-- manu

[1] http://rdfa.digitalbazaar.com/fuzz/trac/

-- 
Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: Monarch - Next Generation REST Web Services
http://blog.digitalbazaar.com/2009/12/14/monarch/
Received on Tuesday, 12 January 2010 15:53:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 19:48:04 UTC