Re: [office-metadata] RDFa model and xml:id

[Elias Torres <eliast@us.ibm.com>]

Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net> wrote on 12/13/2006 02:57:29 PM:

> Elias,
>
[snip]
> Well, it did make me look for recursion anyway. ;-)

Good. :)

>
> Actually one does not look for the parent but for the subject (which is
> held as an attribute in a parent). See 4.3, where I find recursion to
> determine the "subject." The about attribute.

Absolutely: subject-resolution.

>
> And it imposes a requirement that we traverse the DOM tree to find the
> about attribute.

That is correct.

>
> So that does specify how far I must go in the tree, defaults to the
> document if nothing found in between.

That is correct.

>
> I would have to ask one of the engineers what the cost of traversing the
> DOM tree would be versus simply having the required data in a metadata
> statement.

Sure. I'm one of them :). I'd hope that this is not an issue since anybody
dealing with XML has to do for a living, it's called the XML DOM API after
all. I believe it's a good thing to ask whether this is a *major* concern
or not, but I think this is very low-level detail.

>
> Noting that one of the tradeoffs would be that if all the RDF triples
> are in one or more metadata files, you don't have to process the
> content.xml file unless you have some compelling reason to do so. Nor do

You have to traverse the DOM no matter what, because you need to look for
xml:ids.

> you have to walk the DOM tree. We are, afterall, specifying the rules
> and if we don't want to allow syntax that could cause us to hunt for the
> about attribute, we are not obligated to do so.

But we hunt for xml:id.

>
> Hope you are having a great day!
>
> Patrick
>