[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: summarizing recent suggestions
So based on recent discussion and comments from Elias, this is what I see we need: 1) xml:id to identify ODF elements. Suggested schema: xml-id = attribute xml:id { xsd:anyURI } 2) Get rid of the get and set field ideas, and instead just add a single metadata field to display content and associate it with resource descriptions. Suggested schema: meta-field = element meta:field { xml-id, [insert generic ODF content pattern] } Note: in this approach all of the field logic would be encoded in RDF/XML. Let's call this option A. An alternative (let's call this option B) would be to encode some of it in the field (what I had been thinking, though I have no strong opinion either way). 3) metadata attributes on certain content elements to encode their content as object literals. Those attributes are (I am ignoring the value and type stuff, but not deliberately excluding them): meta-about = attribute meta:about { xsd:anyURI } meta-property = attribute meta:property { xsd:anyURI } # not sure if we need this now, or how to use it meta-resource = attribute meta:resource { xsd:anyURI } ... and the pattern would be: meta-literal = meta-about, meta-property 4) to decide on base-URIs and such I think if we agree on the above -- and decide on the field approach -- we're pretty much done with the core of the proposal, absent some minor details and editing. Bruce
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]