Re: rdfa vs. links

On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 03:31:32PM +0100, Michael Hausenblas wrote:
> 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 ;)

Hi Michael,

I guess my question was more *should* than *how* to use
links to the RDF vs. embedded RDFa. Your post points to
an upper bound for where should turns into shouldn't (at
some number of triples where the page takes too long to

As far as should one put RDFa to begin with, supporting
cut-and-paste operations in the UI seems like a compelling
reason (caveats about implementations properly getting
the subject URI aside).

Somehow I'm still leaning towards a minimalistic position
only putting as much information in RDFa as necessary to
give enough context to pull the entire resource. For 
example if I mention Richard Feynman I might want to
embed dbpedia:Richard_Feynman a foaf:Person but not include
copious biographical information in hidden <span>s (unless
I'm writing his biography).


Received on Tuesday, 26 October 2010 16:12:29 UTC