- From: Michael Hausenblas <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
- Date: Tue, 26 Oct 2010 15:31:32 +0100
- To: William Waites <ww@styx.org>
- CC: Semantic Web community <semantic-web@w3.org>
William , Your question motivated me to eventually carry out an experiment I thought of a while ago. Now I got my act together and eventually published some observations on the topic of HTML+RDFa load time dependencies on the number of embedded triples [1]. I hope you find this useful ;) Cheers, Michael [1] http://webofdata.wordpress.com/2010/10/26/rdfa-profiling/ -- Dr. Michael Hausenblas LiDRC - Linked Data Research Centre DERI - Digital Enterprise Research Institute NUIG - National University of Ireland, Galway Ireland, Europe Tel. +353 91 495730 http://linkeddata.deri.ie/ http://sw-app.org/about.html > From: William Waites <ww@styx.org> > Reply-To: William Waites <ww@styx.org> > Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 19:33:14 +0200 > To: Semantic Web community <semantic-web@w3.org> > Subject: rdfa vs. links > Resent-From: Semantic Web community <semantic-web@w3.org> > Resent-Date: Sun, 24 Oct 2010 17:34:05 +0000 > > The argument was recently put to me that "rdfa was designed for > layering rdf into html". While I'm not against the idea of doing > this (and am happy to get data this way from people who find > it more convenient to make them available with RDFa) I generally > prefer to make RDF/XML and N3 available and link to them using > meta http-equiv. > > So the question is about best practices. I can also layer CSS > and JavaScript in HTML using <script> and <style> tags and in > some circumstances it might actually be convenient to do so > but generally I think is better to link to them as separate > documents. Is this not so also with RDF? > > Cheers, > -w >
Received on Tuesday, 26 October 2010 14:32:20 UTC