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] Rough notes (I won't call them minutes just yet)



On Feb 7, 2007, at 6:30 AM, Michael Brauer wrote:

>>     fields
>
> I'm not sure about this. There are many different fields with very 
> different purposes. Do we really need meta data for all fields. Or do 
> we need a meta data field?

The latter.

...

>> Open Questions:
>> 1. object literals in content (may be split)
>
> I'm not feeling comfortable with the term "object literal". What we in 
> my point of view need is the possibility to assign meta data to some, 
> possibly splitted text, in the sense that the meta data says something 
> about this text (for instance, who added it, whether it is important, 
> and so on).
>
> I will clarify that in a different mail.

OK, but note I've been trying to get us to be specific about the 
problem, and the problem is not metatadata in general that might be 
split across nodes. It is object literals. Essentially there are only 
two components to RDF: strings and URIs (leaving aside blank nodes). 
And you can't split a URI.

>> 2. object URIs in content, where subject-object relations may be:
>>     i. local-global (document to something else; citations fit this)
>>     ii. global-global (talking about other stuff; John's use case)
>
> Regarding ii: My understanding of this is that we have an RDF triple 
> where the subject URI does not reference a text literal or other 
> object in the content.xml, and where the object of the triple also 
> does not appear in the content.xml. In that case, the triple seems not 
> to be related to the content.xml at all, and I think we should better 
> move it to a separate RDF-XML stream in the package.

Yes, but the above is referring to examples where the triples do 
"appear in the content.xml". Elias' demo was an example of this.

>> 3. Use of both path and global IRI in a manifest file
>> 4. xml:id required?
>> 5. Preservation of all metadata? Means content not understood must be
>>    preserved.
>
> We have to careful with this. What works is that we say that RDF-XML 
> streams in the package should be preserved, and that we identify a 
> couple of XML elements where we also say that meta data related 
> attributes have to be preserved. What will not work is to preserve 
> meta data at arbitrary elements.

Why can't we say "all foreign attributes must be preserved" everywhere? 
E.g. not just about metadata.

In any case, it makes sense that we should be specific about what we 
mean.

Bruce



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