Re: [office-metadata] Binding proposal

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

On Mar 21, 2007, at 5:05 AM, Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - 
Hamburg wrote:

...

>>> or to have ids only in those documents where they most likely are 
>>> maintained only, and to have no id (or the location of the document 
>>> only) for all other document. My preference actually is the later, 
>>> because it allows you to differ between the document with (most 
>>> likely) maintained ids and those with unmaintained ids.
>> For sake of argument, if we require a document URI, it could be 
>> empty. And requiring a UUID could be with the caveat that 
>> implementors should consider the above problem cases and try to 
>> account for them (unless we can come up with some clever solution to 
>> them now).
>
> It seems to me that our positions aren't really far away from each 
> other. It seems to me that you would like to make the id mandatory, 
> while I would like to encourage implementors to provide these things, 
> but would like to let the users and implementors decide whether they 
> take it or leave it.

Right. We *are* getting close!

>> I want you to consider things from the other side, though:
>> If documents don't have a URI, how do you propose to allow statements 
>> like:
>> <http://ex.net/this> ex:draft <http://ex.net/that> .
>
> I assume "this" is the current document, and "that" some other, and 
> the statement occurs within "this".

Right.

> In this case I would replace "<http://ex.net/this>" with the IRI "." 
> (which denotes the current document). What to do with "that" is indeed 
> more difficult. If it got an id assigned (f.i. http://ex.net/that), 
> then I could take that. Otherwise I would say I cannot make that 
> statement, because the author of "that" did not allow me to refer to 
> her or his document.

Correct. This is just what I want us to understand.

> But let me ask a different question. My understanding is the the IRI 
> "http://ex.net/this"; would be contained in the "that" document, but 
> that it cannot be used to locate that document. If so, how do I locate 
> the document? How do I know where to search for it? On my hard drive 
> only? Or in the internet? What do I do if I find several documents 
> that claim to be "http://ex.net/that";?

If we remember that the URI is only a name (an ID), then we worry about 
this less, and simply say: if this is important, one or more paths for 
that URI may be included.

>> ...? Or say a series of chapters files in a book:
>> <http://ex.net/book/chapters/1> dcterms:isPartOf <http://ex.net/book> 
>> .
>> If you leave the URI optional, you force users to take on the burden 
>> of identification. And if things aren't identified, they cannot be 
>> referenced.
>
> Sorry, bit I need more details to think about this example.

I think you understand the issues given what you say above, but this 
example is: I write a book with 10 chapters, each as separate 
documents. I want to include statements within them that say that.

Bruce