Re: [office-metadata] Finding a common proposal..

[Bruce D'Arcus <bruce.darcus@OpenDocument.us>]

I wrote:

> To my mind, the metadata that definitely must belong in the 
> content.xml file is that which is associated with some displayed 
> content. It is the statements that say this piece of content has this 
> relationship to the document; "this is an event I am hosting" or "this 
> a citation" or "this is a medical diagnosis."

Let me give a bigger picture here.

We have an ODF document. For sake of argument, let's say it has a URI 
of <http://ex.net/docs/1>.

So the existing metadata we already have means statements like (using 
N3):

<http://ex.net/docs/1>
	dc:title "Some Document" ;
	dc:date "2006-12-10" .

So we have two metadata properties added to the document.

The issue is, how do we interpret sub-document content?

What I'm saying is something like:

<http://ex.net/docs/1>
	odf:table <table1> ;
	odf:citation <citation1> ;
	med:diagnosis <diagnosis1> .

<diagnosis1>
	med:doctor <http://ex.net/doctors/1> ;
	med:patient <http://ex.net/patients/1> ;
	med:diagnosis <http://ex.net/diagnoses/1> .

... and yet those statements need to be anchored to the document 
content in question.

Now we can write some convention that extracts those statements from 
existing ODF content nodes (like in GRDDL), but that only works for 
existing nodes, and one has to do hard coding to handle it 
(text:bibliography-mark = odf:citation, etc.).

Further, one cannot cover the last triple with the custom relation. 
E.g. no real support for custom metadata in the content there.

For *that* I'm almost certain we need something very close to RDFa.

The details might be a little off (been a long day!), but I hope it's 
somewhat clear.

Bruce