[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Rough minutes from today
Greetings! Rough minutes attached. Let's continue the unresolved issues on list. Hope everyone is having a great day! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau Patrick@Durusau.net Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model Member, Text Encoding Initiative Board of Directors, 2003-2005 Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!
Metadata Minutes 4 April 2007 Bruce Elias Florian Gary Patrick Svante ********** Svante: Our RDFa always consists of m:about for the RDF subject and m:property for the RDF predicate, the ODF element is always the object. As these attributes are not specified somewhere else, we have to specify what is being used as a value. Currently we specified that by default the ODF element returns as RDF object a string (RDF literal). By this using RDFa would avoid string/Literal duplication in the RDF/XML, which is a great benefit against RDF/XML only usage. How to have a type other than string for the object? doable in RDF Elias like content better, description of the content. IF use rdf:about, then don't need m:about m:datatype URI m:content same as literal inside, used in a narrow range of contexts But, would generate two triples. One to capture the actual language for an image, the href becomes the object, a resource object and not a literal Haven't talked about triples for resource objects. ****** Back to odf:id discussion don't split the manifest into binding and manifest separately. ****** relative URIs on images, would be safer to put an id on it. punting on anything with an href, due to resolution issue
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]