W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > March 2010

Re: client-side storage APIs and RDFa API?

From: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
Date: Wed, 03 Mar 2010 21:36:47 -0500
Message-ID: <4B8F1CBF.5010800@digitalbazaar.com>
To: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
CC: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>, www-tag@w3.org, RDFa Community <public-rdfa@w3.org>
On 03/03/2010 02:55 PM, Dan Connolly wrote:
> Looks like my messages to public-rdfa-wg are getting
> held for moderation; let's try public-rdfa...
> Please confirm receipt, RDFa folks.
>> I'm not sure whether I should be writing to
>> public-rdfa@w3.org or public-rdfa-wg@w3.org. Would you please
>> add something to the archive cover pages to explain their
>> relationship?
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa-wg/
>> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdfa/

ACK Receipt. You may not be subscribed to the public-rdfa-wg mailing
list (that's the mailing list where all RDFa spec and technical
development discussion happens). We'll try to make the distinction
between public-rdfa and public-rdfa-wg more on the page that describes
each list:


> On Wed, 2010-02-24 at 12:40 -0600, Dan Connolly wrote:
>> RDFa WG folks,
>> Ever since the launch of gears, I've been wondering if/how we
>> could use it for client-side RDF storage, a la tabulator.
>> I set it aside as a research interest...
>> Then the other day, I discovered* that Zotero uses the tabulator RDF
>> store... and the TAG is taking a look at WebApps architecture**
>> I had other stuff to do at the time, but I didn't want it
>> to fall on the floor, so I stuck it on my TAG todo list:
>> ACTION-392 on Dan Connolly: Look into using new client side storage APIs
>> as an RDFa or tabulator data store
>> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/group/track/actions/392
>> Has anybody in the RDFa WG given this a thought?

Yes and no. Ivan has brought up the idea of RDFa data stores a number of
times and Toby Inkster has said that he would be interested in producing
a note on that subject in the RDFa WG.

We have this document noted in the RDFa WG charter:

   * RDF TripleStore APIs, Note: Finding of the group on generic
     TripleStore APIs. Publication of this note is optional.

We also have this REC-track deliverable:

  * RDFa 1.1 API, Recommendation: This document will define a generic
    API for accessing RDFa data contained in the current page.

>> I don't see anything close in your issues list.
>> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/track/issues
>> If you added this to your issues list, I could maybe cross it off
>> my TAG todo list.

The RDFa API is meant to extract triples from the current document only.
We are leaving the decision on how to store those triples for later use
as a part of the RDF TripleStore APIs Note.

Would the creation of an RDFa TripleStore API Note be acceptable, or
would you want a full RDF storage spec defined in WebIDL? While we have
people that are interested in RDF storage in the RDFa WG, it's not our
primary focus.

-- manu

Manu Sporny (skype: msporny, twitter: manusporny)
President/CEO - Digital Bazaar, Inc.
blog: PaySwarming Goes Open Source
Received on Thursday, 4 March 2010 02:37:17 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:33 UTC