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

[Elias Torres <eliast@us.ibm.com>]

Svante.Schubert@Sun.COM wrote on 12/13/2006 08:57:04 PM:

[snip]
> I believe everyone would like to avoid duplication, as it is equivalent
> to the risk of inconsistency.
> Although Elias might say - as so often - that as the application will
> handle the data and not a human will edit it by himself, the risk of
> inconsistency between the duplicated data of content and metadata is
> about zero, we have to be aware that there is a risk, as soon we have
> duplication.
> On the other hand as soon we are starting to deal with metadata, there
> is always a risk that RDF subject and RDF object are no longer
> consistent. For example the name of the person in the content might be
> changed and no longer belong to the vcard data in the metadata.
>
> In the end we have to compare and weight use cases to get to our desired
> design.
>

Right. Svante, we are looking for a couple of things from you. One is a
proposal with examples of how it addresses the use cases requirements and
second a exact list of objections of why do you think we should not RDFa.
If would really help if we could compare and address those issues in a
systematic way. I feel the arguments are going in circles.

-Elias