- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Wed, 17 Oct 2001 10:31:02 -0500
- To: Norman Walsh <Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM>, dom@w3.org, danbri@w3.org
- CC: spec-prod@w3.org
Norman Walsh wrote: > > / Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org> was heard to say: > | OASIS is leading towards the XML version of DocBook. The W3C started to use > | xmlspec in 1996/1997 with the XML specification itself. I didn't look > | closely at DocBook and I'm still wondering how far we go into producing > | a common schema for specifications, but is there any chance that we can merge > | both somehow (or use a correct extension mechanism)? > > Considering <article> in DocBook to be roughly equivalent to <spec>, > I arrive at the following comparison (off the top of my head): > > DocBook Articles vs. XMLSpec > > - The "meta" is quite different, XMLSpec has a whole bunch of W3C-specific > metadata. This could (should?) be addressed by creating an XML namespace > for the W3C metadata. The DocBook TC is evaluating what to do with meta > and allowing namespaced meta seems like a good idea. Regarding metadata, I've done a bunch of work in this area. I scraped our TR index into RDF: http://www.w3.org/2000/04/mem-news/tr2.rdf technical details on how it works are described, at least in a way that the machine understands, in... http://www.w3.org/2000/04/mem-news/Makefile I haven't written it up for people ;-) The format, in brief, is: <REC rdf:about="http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/REC-xpath-19991116"> <dc:date>1999-11-16</dc:date> <dc:title>XML Path Language (XPath) Version 1.0</dc:title> <doc:versionOf rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/TR/xpath"/> <editor rdf:parseType="Resource"> <contact:fullName>James Clark</contact:fullName> </editor> <editor rdf:parseType="Resource"> <contact:fullName>Steve DeRose</contact:fullName> </editor> </REC> using a whole bunch of namespace that we're working on in Semantic Web Advanced Development: <rdf:RDF xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rec54#" xmlns:contact="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/contact#" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:doc="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/doc#" xmlns:h="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xmlns:log="http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/log#" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:v="file:/home/connolly/w3ccvs/WWW/2000/04/mem-news/tr-merge.n3#"> The rec54 namespace is some work I've done on codifying the W3C process in RDF: http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rec54 http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rec54.n3 -- in RDF/n3 http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rec54.rdf -- in RDF/xml http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rec54.png -- diagram in PNG http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rec54.svg -- diagram in SVG The diagram tools are something I've written up for people: http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/ (Norm, that's the stuff I showed you in Cambridge). I've also got a script to convert the IETF RFC index to RDF, http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rfcIndexGrok.pl and a schema/model of their process: http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rfc65 http://www.w3.org/2001/02pd/rfc65.n3 This stuff started as a result of automating the list of URI schemes... http://www.w3.org/Addressing/schemes I started thinking about automating the maintenance of it... new URI schemes come from RFCs, so I needed an automated source of RFC metadata... and of course it seemed silly to have the IETF's digital library described in RDF without doing W3C's own, so I did that; I'm hoping it's useful to demonstrate stuff to the dublin core community... the IETF has its metadata, W3C has ours, and they're related (by, e.g. rdf:subPropertyOf assertions) in a way that we can exploit in RDF query engines. Danbri, did your work on this cross-vocabulary query stuff come together? Meanwhile... Dominique Hazaël-Massieux, our webmaster, has been working on a tool to chec W3C publications w.r.t. our publication rules... http://www.w3.org/2001/07/pubrules-form http://www.w3.org/2001/07/pubrules-checker.xml We're working on enhancing it to produce metadata in RDF ala the above as a byproduct of checking. So whatever format folks use to write specs, pls consider the RDF format above for metadata, and/or consider an XSLT gizmo to extract RDF metadata, and/or just before you can generate XHTML per W3C publication rules, so we can get the metadata out that way. [... more on other stuff separately...] -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 17 October 2001 11:31:06 UTC