Re: Dropping RDF mapping from microdata spec

In a G+ post [1], I described the option to my Microdata parser for generating property URIs from tokens:

The :rdf_terms option changes the processing algorithm for generating URIs from @itemprop values that are not already an absolute URI. Using the in-scope type (from @itemtype, or fallback_type), replace everything following the last '/' or '#' with the term. This results in more familiar URIs, and works so long as normal RDF vocabularies are used for minting types.

For example, consider the case where @itemtype is "" and @itemprop is "name". Using the standard scheme, the generated property URI would be <>. Using the :rdf_terms option, it will generate the following URI: <>.

I think this is much more useful for people in general. There may be some corner-cases where this doesn't work, and I'd be interested in comments from the community.



On Jul 27, 2011, at 9:58 AM, Jeni Tennison wrote:

Hi Michael :)

On 27 Jul 2011, at 17:29, Michael Hausenblas wrote:
I know that Michael Hausenblas and others have been working on doing a mapping from<> to RDF; perhaps that might work as the basis for a Community Group that could look at defining a mapping.

The<> sponsors have taken up this work and directly provide an OWL version now [1]. We collect and maintain mappings from widely deployed RDF vocabularies to<> via<> [2] ... which reminds me that I have an action to properly update our site with the recent changes ;)

I had a recollection that you were also creating RDF versions of pages that contained<> microdata. Is that right?

I know that the RDF versions of the<> properties have nice simple URIs like which wouldn't naturally arise from microdata's RDF mapping.

My question is, if I have recalled correctly that you are dynamically creating RDF from pages marked up with<> microdata, is the mapping that you use generic (e.g. map any short-name property into a URI based on the itemtype of the nearest item) or specific to<> (i.e. recognise those particular short-name properties on items with a<> type)?


Jeni Tennison

Received on Wednesday, 27 July 2011 20:05:58 UTC