[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office-metadata] Persistence of the relation betweentext:meta-field and it's metadata.
Bruce D'Arcus wrote: > > On May 16, 2007, at 10:11 AM, Svante Schubert wrote: > >>> Perhaps if Elias is there today he just take a few minutes to >>> explain his position again? I really don't want to spend the entire >>> call talking about this though. We need a tight agenda where we can >>> wrap our work (at least WRT to concalls) up today if possible. >> Do we really need further implementation experience to specify >> informations to give ODF applications the opportunity to relate an >> xml:id of the text:meta-field to metadata files? > > If there's debate about the best way to do this (or even that "this" > is the goal), maybe yes. > >> This argument to wait for implementation experience could be given >> for the whole data of the metadata manifest. > > True, but so far we've had no disagreements about those details. > >> Why allowing odf:type on files and not on elements? >> We should be able to draw a line based on arguments traceable by >> outsiders. > > I agree we should clarify. Perhaps a short discussion during the call > and then a resolution in the minutes? > That seems adequate. I suggest as solution to give at least the possibility to add odf:type to an odf:Element, without specifying that this is the way the relation will be established, leaving room for more sophisticated solutions (e.g. reference to a namespace). OWL question: In this context I am uncertain if we can specify odf:type twice once domain odf:Element and once with a domain odf:File. We might specify two properties odf:element-type and odf:file-type or create a super class odf:Thing for all ODF nodes as odf:Element / odf:File. Svante
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]