Re: [office-metadata] Regarding the “split” problem/use-case

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

On Jan 17, 2007, at 8:03 AM, Bruce D'Arcus wrote:

>> With bookmarks you can achieve the same thing as with object:id’s --- 
>> I believe.
>>
>> E.g. consider the ODF fragment
>> <text:p >XXX <text:bookmark-start 
>> text:name="_MYBOOKMARK"/>MMMMM</text:p>
>> <text:p >MMMM<text:bookmark-end text:name="_MYBOOKMARK"/> 
>> XXXX</text:p>
>>
>> We could then have an RDF statement like
>> (bookmark::_MYBOOKMARK, my:mark, “Important”)
>
> Not really. This achieves the same thing as using meta:about. It 
> identifies a subject; not an association between objects for merging 
> the literals (which is what the object:id attribute does). So you 
> haven't really solved the problem ;-)

*Unless* we want to say that the text:name attribute is equivalent to 
object:id in that it's purpose is to identify a literal that amy be a 
metadata object.

I have no opinion.

Bruce