a usps namespace document using plain XHTML and GRDDL (namespaceDocument-8, fragmentInXML-28)

A few years ago I made up a namespace for U.S. postal
terms, so that I could automate production of mailing labels.
Until now, the schema was scribbly little bits of N3.
I just upgraded it to be human-readable:


There are XHTML and RDF variants of it:

So if you ask cwm to look at it...

$ python $swap/cwm.py http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/usps

it will read the RDF/XML and tell you
about http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/usps#MailingLocation
a la...

     @prefix : <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
     @prefix usps: <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/usps#> .

    usps:MailingLocation     a :Class;
         :label "Mailing Location".


You can also point your browser at

and it will highlight an item in a list of classes.

The HTML representation uses transformation links in the GRDDL
profile to expresses all of the formal meaning given
in the RDF representation.

Note that this represents a position on issue fragmentInXML-28

Namely: that an HTML document that says "#frag is a class"
can be consistent with an html document that uses id="frag"
on an ordinary element such as a list item, at least
if the XHTML uses a profile that says what's going on.

Norm, I intend for this to discharge my action on namespaceDocument-8,
though now that I review records, it's phrased as:

  DanC: draft a section on using XHTML 1.x (not RDDL) with GRDDL
  and relax-ng [30 Aug 05]

I thought my action was to exhibit a namespace document that
used ordinary XHTML 1.x markup, not RDDL, to express its formal
meaning; and to validate the formal-meaning markup with relax-ng.
I must admit I haven't even started on the relax-ng part, since
I read...

  "... RELAX NG can almost, but not quite, do it."
  -- http://norman.walsh.name/2005/09/05/microformats

Meanwhile, the document is completely XHTML 1.x DTD valid.

It uses no terms from the RDDL namespace whatsoever. I thought
the relationship between the namespace document and the code
that produces mailing labels would be among the well-known
RDDL purposes, but I didn't see one. The list of software purposes
seems to be 404. I just used rdfs:seeAlso for that

       dc:title "An RDF Schema for United States Postal Addressing
         :seeAlso <http://pe.usps.gov/cpim/ftp/pubs/Pub28/pub28.pdf>,
                <http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/jobieLabels.pl> .

I can't tell from the records of our most
recent discussion of namespaceDocument-8
whether a namespace document SHOULD or MAY or MUST use some
rddl natures or purposes.

And I'm still a little murky on the "draft a section" part of my
action. Is what I have done sufficient for you to start
on your action?

  NDW: follow-up on namespaceDocument-8, based on DanC's vanilla
  XHTML example [30 Aug 05]
  -- http://www.w3.org/2005/08/30-tagmem-irc#T18-11-44

Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Friday, 7 October 2005 21:04:11 UTC