- From: Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN <champin@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr>
- Date: Mon, 28 Aug 2000 10:44:13 +0200
- To: Ron Daniel <rdaniel@metacode.com>
- CC: w3c-xml-linking-ig@w3.org, ML RDF-interest <www-rdf-interest@w3c.org>
Ron Daniel wrote: > > Apologies for the delay in informing people... > > A couple of weeks ago the XML Linking WG discussed > the issue of what to do about the XLink->RDF mapping > NOTE. The decision was to finish it off and publish > it as a NOTE, investing the minimum amount of additional > work needed for that task. Beyond that, the WG does > not intend to work on the document. > > So, I am going to make another pass over the document > and then call it done. People who want to get any > changes into the document need to make requests > to me (cc'ing the rdf-interest and xml-linking-interest > lists) by the end of next week (Sept. 1). I found it very interesting, and I think it is a shame that so few people manifested interest about it - especially when so many people are concerned about RDF syntax and RDF-enabling any XML document... A few comments : - introduction of section 3.3 reads "Then we describe the rules for the extended link as a whole." but there is no such rules (as I understand it, they have been removed from older versions) - about expanding QNames by concatenation : as I already mentionned it in the rdf-interest list, I quite don't like the idea of concatenating a namespace with a tagname. Although I admit this can be reasonable with an RDF-dedicated namespace, this seems much more hazardous in any XML document. The note suggests that when no xlink:arcrole is given, the element QName be so expanded and used as the RDF predicate. I would rather propose two appoaches when no xlink:arcrole is given : * no triple is generated - the xlink:arcrole MUST be present to generate a triple * an implicit arcrole is assumed, e.g. http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink/properties/arc - about RDF predicates xlink:title, xlink:label : how are they supposed to be expanded ? http://www.w3.org/1999/xlinktitle and http://www.w3.org/1999/xlinklabel (which strictly follows the concatenation rule but is obviously wrong ;-) or http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink/properties/title and http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink/properties/label which sounds sane... This should be clearly stated in the note. Pierre-Antoine Champin --- Quid quid Latine dictum sit, altum viditur Whatever is said in Latin sounds important.
Received on Monday, 28 August 2000 04:32:54 UTC