Re: [office-metadata] clarifying fields and metadata

[Svante Schubert <Svante.Schubert@Sun.COM>]

Bruce,

Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
>
> On Mar 13, 2007, at 8:36 AM, Svante Schubert wrote:
>
>> I assume that "Jane Doe" is the patient, who is described as 
>> "http://ex.net/contacts/2";.
>> Why not say the following:
>>
>>    <text:meta-label
>>        meta:about="http://ex.net/contacts/2";
>>        meta:property="ex:salutation">Dear Jane Doe</text:meta-label>
>
> That's different though. Here I presume you mean by meta:property 
> essentially a display property. I'd expect that in many cases, that 
> would be up to implementations to define, and it wouldn't be needed.
By using especially the 'text:meta-label' instead of common ODF elements 
using RDFa (like text:p or text:meta with about/property) there is 
already a differentiation for this text-portion.
This was the reasons to introduce this element. By doing so the 
application has the chance to address and possibly view the content 
differently.

Why not take 'meta:property' to describe the label you are using?
In case we would not have an extra citation field, the various forms of 
citation fields could be distinguished by the RDF predicate.
> I'd say we want an optional attribute called text:display-property.
Could you define the function of a text:display-property attribute?
>
> In any case, my example was the medical use case, where a doctor is 
> adding triples to their content.
>
>> and moving the triple
>> <http://ex.net/contacts/1> <http://medical.org/patient> 
>> <http://ex.net/contacts/2> .
>> into RDF/XML?
>
> This is an interesting question indeed.
>
>> IMHO by giving the label a RDF predicate describing the label the 
>> need of the meta:resource is no longer given and the usage of less 
>> attributes makes it easier for the user.
>
> It definitely doesn't make it "easier for the user", as in each case 
> they want to make the same statement. From a UI standpoint it 
> shouldn't make any difference really.
>
> I think if it makes it easier for anyone, it's us!
ODF users might get confused, if there is a third attribute 
meta:resource aside meta:about and meta:property or if there is only a 
single meta:about.
Actually I was, when I first saw it. I really like the clearness and 
consistency of one triple each element. My 2 cents.
>
> OK, let me propose a strawman for people to consider:
>
> text-meta-label = element text:meta-label { text-meta-label-attlist, 
> generic-odf-text }
>
> # if property/resource are present, triple is defined in content
> text-meta-label-attlist = meta-about, ( meta-property, meta-resource )?
>
> As Michael said, we also need the two other attributes.
>
> The question is whether we allow the statements in content, or whether 
> we require them be stored in the RDF/XML and explicitly say in the 
> proposal something about Svante's idea of "moving the triples".
Svante