Re: [office-metadata] My Proposal Review

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

Svante.Schubert@Sun.COM wrote on 02/22/2007 08:31:43 AM:

>
> Elias Torres wrote:
> > 1.1 has a to be discussed item:
> >
> > [2beDiscussed: There is currently no validation mechanism of RDF/XML
> > consistency. In other words the plugin might have problems to guarantee
for
> > the consistency data from other plugins, in other words can only
guarantee
> > for his data.Furthermore, there is no validation about completeness of
the
> > RDF/XML, only the plugin knows what is mandatory? ]
> >
> > There's a validation mechanism for RDF/XML. Validation in that we can
> > ensure is valid RDF, but not whether it conforms to a specific ontology
or
> > schema.
> >
> > http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/
> >
> In general I would like to postpone this, until we figured out the
> higher priority problems.
>
> But for clarification: the user problem I had in mind was not the
> validation of the XML provided by RDF/XML, but a possible validation of
> metadata provided in RDF/XML.
> For instance, the completeness of data or any other restriction logic
> the user might want to validate for instance with ISO Schematron, but
> XPath is usually week on RDF/XML.

k. I understandt. But validation of RDF/XML vocabularies and data
consistency is outside of our scope. I think we need to leave that for the
next version.

>
> > 1.2.1 The use of rdf:about as elements anchors is incorrect.
> >
> > It should be as we discussed on the call today meta:id
> >
> Unfortunately there had been a renaming from meta:id to rdf:about as a
> last minute change made by the editors.
> (We wanted to keep the schedule and the spec took us more time than we
> earlier thought.)
> In the following that quick exchanged even result into some
> inconsistency at the metadata text fields, I will mention further below.
> > 1.2.2.
> >
> > """ When a text portion of the content is created from metadata or the
text
> > portion is a metadata literal, which might reoccur in a RDF/XML file,
the
> > text portion should handled by a metadata text field for reasons of
data
> > integrity. """
> >
> > I really don't understand either of these scenarios. This is where
Svante
> > had said meta:about and meta:property were being relegated to and now I
> > read:
> >
> > """The optional attribute pair “rdf:about” and  rdf:property.
> > rdf:about represents the RDF subject IRI of the RDF statement and
> > “rdf:property” represents the RDF predicate IRI."""
> >
> > They are optional? What can we possibly use this
> > meta:text-set-get-field-whatever if the attributes needed to construct
a
> > triple are optional?
> >
> I am sorry, here is the inconsistency caused by the renaming of meta:id
> to rdf:about in the last minute.
> The rdf:about attribute is mentioned twice, earlier one was a meta:id.
> The RDFa attributes are optional because instead of a RDF statement
> established by using RDFa, the RDF statement might be given by using the
> IRI of meta:id.

k.

> (Although I do not want to suggest between xml:id and a meta:id here, I
> would like to separate this question from this mail.)

k.

>
> > """ “meta:value-type” and “meta:value” """
> >
> > value-type I'm assuming is analogous to meta:class discussed today in
the
> > call. I think we don't need it (because we can specify that inside
> > RDF/XML).
> >
> No, "meta:value-type" might extend the existing ODF mechanism described
> in "Variable Value Types and Values".

I need to read that document. What about if there are multiple values?
Also, what about the datatype need to know if we want a plain literal or
XMLLiteral, or xsd:int like in RDFa?

> It is chapter 6.7.1 in the OpenDocument 1.1. specification.
> > with the same reasoning meta:value is not needed either since we can
bind
> > that in the RDF/XML file.
> >
> see the chapter mentioned above.
> > """“meta:impl”"""
> >
> > This should not be needed either. We need to push this back to the
RDF/XML.
> >
> The ODF application need to know which plugin usually take care of this
> text field.

The usually is the problem. I don't see why one plug-in handles the data.
Should there be one plugin to handle vCard information? I wouldn't want us
to allow for a fight between plugin writers of who can set that attribute.
Let's leave it to the RDF/XML where many can exist happily ever after.

>
> > """In case a text portion is autogenerated by the RDF plugin and shall
> > therefore only be changed from the RDF plugin, the should be marked as
a
> > metadata text field.
> > is based on metadata and the text is autogenerated by the plugin take
> > responsibility of the handling from the content, two additional
elements
> > are provided: 'meta:text-get' and 'meta:text-set'."""
> >
> > I definitely need examples for this. If a text portion is
auto-generated by
> > an RDF plugin then what is it exactly that we need to do?
> >
> I will give examples right away in a follow up mail.

Thanks for your reply and your hard work on the draft (with Patrick too of
course).

>
> Regards,
> Svante
> > -Elias
> >
> > patrick@durusau.net wrote on 02/19/2007 04:51:31 PM:
> >
> >
> >> Greetings!
> >>
> >> Well, due largely to long hours and hard work by Svante Schubert we
now
> >> have a draft proposal for the Metadata SC to discuss!
> >>
> >> No doubt we will all have comments and suggestions and I know everyone
> >> knows how to use the mailing list. ;-)
> >>
> >> Please send comments and suggestions along with *proposed* revision
> >> language keyed to the section that you think needs revision. That will
be
> >>
> > a
> >
> >> great assistance in focusing discussion on particular parts of the
> >> proposal.
> >>
> >> Hope everyone is having a great day!
> >>
> >> Patrick
> >>
> >>  -- Patrick Durusau*
> >>
> >> The document named Metadata_Model_Proposal (07-02-19-ODF-MetaData.odt)
> >>
> > has
> >
> >> been submitted by Patrick Durusau* to the OpenDocument - Metadata
> >>
> > document
> >
> >> repository.
> >>
> >> Document Description:
> >> Metadata Committee proposal for revision of metadata in ODF 1.2
> >>
> >> View Document Details:
> >> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/office-
> >> metadata/document.php?document_id=22508
> >>
> >> Download Document:
> >> http://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/office-
> >> metadata/download.php/22508/07-02-19-ODF-MetaData.odt
> >>
> >>
> >> PLEASE NOTE:  If the above links do not work for you, your email
> >>
> > application
> >
> >> may be breaking the link into two pieces.  You may be able to copy and
> >>
> > paste
> >
> >> the entire link address into the address field of your web browser.
> >>
> >> -OASIS Open Administration
> >>