Re: [office-metadata] Groups - MetaData-Examples_07-06-21 (MetaData-Examples_07-06-21.odt) uploaded

[Bruce D'Arcus <bdarcus@gmail.com>]

Guys,

Looks really good! Nice work.

I have a couple of suggested changes and things to keep in mind for  
discussions with the TC (based on discussions with Svante today).

First, this:

> In this scenario the document editor associates part of the document  
> with metadata.

I really, really think we need to avoid using vague statements like  
"metadata" when we can instead use more specific terms like "resource  
description" or "resource property." The reason is because I think  
people will get confused.

Also, this example has a bunch of problems:

<med:patient rdf:about="http://ex-hospital-DB/patients/ID98765";>
	<ex:hasID rdf:resource="ID98765"/>
	<ex:hasVitals>
     	<med:vitalData rdf:about="http://hospital-DB/medical-note-cc1593";>
	    	<rdf:type  
rdf:resource="http://docs.oasis-open.org/opendocument/meta/ 
package#Element"/>
     	</rdf:Description>
	</ex:hasVitals>
</med:patient>

First, note that this is not well-formed XML.

Second, resources should be capitalized.

Third, as I mentioned before, I think this nested RDF/XML obscures  
what's going on with the graph, and should be:

<med:Patient rdf:about="http://ex-hospital-DB/patients/ID98765";>
    <ex:hasID rdf:resource="ID98765"/>
    <ex:hasVitals rdf:resource="http://hospital-DB/medical-note-cc1593"/>
</med:Patient>

<med:VitalData rdf:about="http://hospital-DB/medical-note-cc1593";>
    <rdf:type  
rdf:resource="http://docs.oasis-open.org/opendocument/meta/ 
package#Element"/>
</med:VitalData>

Finally, surely the rdf:type statement there is wrong, or at least  
unnecessary?

Bruce