Re: [office-metadata] Example of rdfa in a medical note

[John Madden <john.madden@duke.edu>]

Hi Patrick,

>
> <span property="snomed:birthdate">7/11/1915 </span><text:s/>Age:  
> <span property="snomed:age">89</span></text:p>
>
> or
>
> <span xml:id="m_001">7/11/1915</span>
> <span xml:id="m_002">89</span>
>
> While elsewhere:
>
> <metadata xml:id="m_001>
>   <property="snomed:birthdate"/>
> </metadata>
>
> <metadata xml:id="m_002>
>   <property="snomed:age"/>
> </metadata>
>
> Noting that I can add more properties, perhaps ones that use other  
> vocabularies to enable mappings to vocabularies other than snomed  
> without having to touch the content of the content.xml file.
>
> The xml:id is only linking the delimited content to the metadata  
> for that content, nothing more or less.
>
> Oh, you were saying something about loss of granularity...? ;-)
>
> Hope you are having a great day!


If you put xml:id on every element single element that you ever  
referenced in the document your strategy would work fine.

But isn't this just shifting the problem ?  Now I can't understand my  
RDF without having the content document open onscreen next to it.

Perhaps that doesn't matter -- especially if you've got a widescreen  
monitor!  ;-)

Seriously, in a fundamental way it doesn't matter. xml:id is  
precisely as "granular" as rdfa is. That's quite right!

John