OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office-metadata message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


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


Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net> wrote on 12/06/2006 11:36:45 AM:

> Bruce,
>
> Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
>
> >
> > On Dec 6, 2006, at 10:51 AM, Patrick Durusau wrote:
> >
> >>> But let's be clear: when you move the metadata out of the content,
> >>> you lose other functionality; for example, the ability for the user
> >>> to be able to access specific chunks of content as
> >>> metadata-enhanced; imagine being able to hover over a span of
> >>> metadata-enhanced text that represents a client -- "Jane Doe" -- and
> >>> having the application display additional information about them.
> >>>
> >> Sorry, I don't see why you would say that? Where is the loss of
> >> functionality?
> >
> >
> > Heh, good point :-)
>
> I do try. ;-)
>
> >
> > This is a simple example that doesn't show what I mean (as I said,
> > long day yesterday!).
> >
> > But say if you have a more complex statement (or series of them) in
> > the text -- "Patrick is attending the XML2006 conference" -- and both
> > the subject ("Patrick") and the object ("XML2006 conference") are
> > resources with additional metadata (you have your vCard embedded in
> > the package). If you have that triple in the package, then the string
> > "Patrick" isn't going to be identified as a discrete metadata object
> > in the content file. Now, the entire span or field might get
> > highlighted and you could then access that further information, but it
> > wouldn't be directly accessible from the text.
> >
> Err, but aren't you confusing the content of the text with its
> representation in metadata?
>
> Yes, I have a complex statement (or a series of them) in the text:
> "Patrick is attending the XML2006 conference." and I mark Patrick and
> XML2006 conference separately with spans. Those spans point to those as
> resources in the metadata file. The triple in question, my attending the
> XML conference is represented separately from those two resources. One
> of the things that an interface could do is show all the triples in
> which those resources participate.
>
> Or to put it another way, why can't "Patrick" be represented as the
> object of metadata? Is that some limitation of RDFa? Or just a
> convention in terms of how people think about writing triples based upon
> particular content?

"Patrick" can be a resource or a literal.

The resource case:

<a rel="ex:attendee" href="#patrick">Patrick</a>

The literal case:

<span property="ex:attendee">Patrick</a>

It's not a limitation of RDFa. I think it was just the example that Bruce
was trying to make.

>
> Afterall, Patrick may appear in the document a number of times and I
> would be hard pressed to think of a reason why metadata for Patrick
> should be replicated in every triple where Patrick occurs as a resource.

If you use a literal, then we'd need a convention to hook the metadata up.
But if we used a resource, then we only need one copy of the metadata.

>
> My impression is that triples can reference other triples, if you insist
> on representing Patrick as a triple so that would give me one triple for
> Patrick that is referenced from all the other triples that need to make
> use of it. So I attach my vCard only once and it is available any time
> someone sees metadata for Patrick.

triples can reference other triples (sort-of), it's called reification, but
I don't think that's what you are asking. I think you meant resources, but
anyways, what you said is right if you replace s/triple/resources for all
triples in the above paragraph except for the first.

>
> Hope you are having a great day!

Better than others this month. Thanks!

>
> Patrick
>
> > That's all I mean.
> >
> > But thanks for clarifying.
> >
> >> Actually I have been told there are advantages to having separate
> >> files, even though a little bit harder with XSLT. You have all the
> >> notes, for example, in a separate file which enables them to be
> >> processed separately and without a larger content model than
> >> necessary. Thinking that with metadata there might be similar
> >> advantages.
> >
> >
> > Exactly. It is indeed analogous (and in an ideal blank slate world,
> > notes and comments could be understood as metadata).
> >
> >> Where in a medical situation I want to extract all the metadata from
> >> an entire store of documents for navigational purposes, say all the
> >> times Doctor X entered a prescription for valium for patient Y.
> >> Should not be necessary for me to process all the document content to
> >> get that answer. If the metadata resides in content.xml, I do.
> >
> >
> > Yes, also right. There is a design trade-off. I (and I think Elias)
> > are just saying that it's hard to legislate what ought to be
> > context-specific design decisions. Generally keep the metadata out of
> > the content file, but not disallow it.
> >
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> 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!
>
>



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]