Re: XHTML 2 Role Tag

I was just answering Will question to the same affect, but my setting on
this computer did not make it clear who was replying to what

I would represent it as three triples with a blank node but the point is the
same .It takes more then on triple and is not using the predicate "role"

Role is just one predicate. and we must be careful not to overload it or it
will become meaningless.

What i find much mre interesting is that they are now proposing to allow you
to embed RDF using "link" syntax dirctly into XHTML.

This does not give us any more power, just bits of the power of RDF in a
more useable form.

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jason White" <>
To: "Lisa Seeman" <>
Cc: "Will Pearson" <>; <>
Sent: Friday, November 12, 2004 6:58 AM
Subject: Re: XHTML 2 Role Tag

> First a terminological note: it isn't a tag, it is an element. "Tag"
> refers to a start-tag, and end-tag or an "empty element" tag in XML,
> but not to the whole element.
> Lisa Seeman writes:
>  >
>  >   ----- Whilst the semantics of the role are conveyed by the proposed
tag, I don't see how it covers other encoding channels such as spatial
relationships.  For example, there could be an advertising image to the left
of a block of text.  The semantic meaning conveyed by this relationship may
be that the image is an advertisement for the text content, ie. a picture of
a product and some blurb about that product next to it.
> In this case the relationship to be encoded is not spatial, even
> though it can be presented spatially. Rather, it is the two-place
> predicate "is an advertisement for", as in "x is an advertisement for
> y", where x is an image with a text equivalent, and y is an
> advertisement. RDF can be used to express such relationships; it is
> not the purpose of the proposed ROLE element to do so.

Received on Friday, 12 November 2004 06:28:30 UTC