Re: [office] Re: [office-metadata] [issue] split object literals

[Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>]

Michael,

With the usual disclaimers about not being an RDF expert:

Michael Brauer wrote:

> Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jan 10, 2007, at 9:06 AM, Michael Brauer wrote:
>>
>> ...
>>
>>> ... the case I'm talking about is that I want to say something about 
>>> the text "Some Title", for instance, add the author or an additional 
>>> description. Maybe I have overseen something, but isn't the subject 
>>> in this case the text "Some title"? If so, how do you represent this?
>>
>>
>> Practically speaking, with the example of a title, the subject is 
>> either the current document, or some other document; it would not be 
>> the span of text. Moreover, that string is an object.
>
>
> Is this a restriction of RDF? Is there no way to take a sub tree of an
> XML element as a subject?
>
I think we need to talk during the conference call about what we mean by 
"subject."

When you say "a sub tree of an XML element as a subject" do you mean:

1. You want to make a statement about the sub tree of an XML element qua 
sub tree as a subject?

or,

2. You want to make a statement about the content of the sub tree of an 
XML element as a subject?

Recalling that subjects are specified by URIs in RDF, hence the 
rdf:about attribute with a URI.

When Bruce says the "document" is the subject, that is the "default" 
subject if an rdf:about attribute on a container element under which the 
other RDF attributes occur. That is an artifact of the RDFa specfication.

I think part of the problem is that we haven't really been clear when we 
say "subject" what we are talking about. (I should have spotted that 
sooner, apologies.)

Does that help?

Hope you are having a great day!

Patrick


>
>>>>>
>>>>> The attribute that defines the id (in terms of XML) is xml:id. The 
>>>>> office:belongs-to attributes are references to this id only. 
>>>>> Although only a single id is used here, we cannot omit the 
>>>>> <office:meta-subject> element, because we need to define the id 
>>>>> that has to be unique.
>>>>
>>>> Why this last requirement?
>>>
>>>
>>> XML ids have to be unique.
>>
>>
>> Yes, but why do need the id?
>>
>>> That is, there must not be more than one attributes of datatype ID 
>>> that have the same value. We may of course take some attribute 
>>> datatype, but then, the fragment identifier do now work anymore, 
>>> because they operate on attributes of type ID only
>>> .
>>
>>
>> Correct, but at least in RDF, one would never reference a property; 
>> not part of the model. One references resources (subjects).
>
>
> But what if the resource (subject) actually is an XML sub tree?
>
> Michael
>
>
>
>

-- 
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!