Re: [office-metadata] RDFa model and xml:id

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

On Dec 13, 2006, at 8:09 AM, Patrick Durusau wrote:

> Consider that if we follow RDF/RDFa with using URIs to identify 
> subjects, how do we distinguish those from ones simply meant as a 
> linking mechanism? Moreover, if I point to an element, do I mean for 
> the element per se to be the subject or something that the element 
> encloses?

I'd just keep it simple and emphasize it allows formally addressable 
identification of resources within the document.

You can do:

<text:p xml:id="foo">...</text:p>

... and from anywhere (including outside the document) add statements 
to it:

<http://ex.net/mydoc/content.xml#foo> security:level "1" .
<http://ex.net/mydoc/content.xml#foo> dc:subject 
<http://ex.net/topics/bar> .

... etc.

But you cannot express relationships between the document and the 
resource with this approach (because you disallow properties within the 
content).

Also, I still really want to be able to include the resource links 
within my citation field (for copy-and-paste and such). That might 
suggest a third option that is somewhere between 1 and 2, allowing 
metadata properties within specific contexts (like the field).

> I think if we separate our discussions along those lines we will 
> achieve some clarity. Note that I am not presuming that we will reach 
> agreement but at least it will be clear where we disagree. Which is 
> often the first step towards reaching consensus. If we don't 
> understand each other there is little chance of resolving 
> disagreements.

I agree this is a helpful approach.

Bruce