Re: [office-metadata] meta-field and more...

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

Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
>
> On May 10, 2007, at 4:09 PM, Elias Torres wrote:
>
>> 1. How does a plugin finds its named graph in respect to an element?
>>
>> 2. How does an ODF application finds a plugin given an element?
>
> I think so, but am not clear how they're different.
>
Bruce,

The first case is slightly different. A plug-in might use multiple files 
with different named RDF graphs. By giving the element a pointer to the 
named graph more information is provided. But this is not a real 
problem, the plug-in might find out by itself from it's RDF/XML 
metadata, where the element belongs to, therefore 1. is not a real issue 
to me.

The reason to use a named graph as a placeholder for the file, was to 
indirectly refer to the rdf:types of this file.

<odf:Element odf:idref="id" rdf:about="uri:elementURI">
     <odf:belongsTo rdf:resource="http://someNamedGraph"/>
</odf:Element>

<odf:MetaDataFile rdf:about="http://someNamedGraph";>
    <rdf:type rdf:resource="uri:citation-type"/>
    <rdf:type rdf:resource="uri:vcard-type"/>
</odf:MetaDataFile>

As to me the same information set as

<odf:Element odf:idref="id" rdf:about="uri:elementURI">
    <rdf:type rdf:resource="uri:citation-type"/>
    <rdf:type rdf:resource="uri:vcard-type"/>
</odf:Element>


The relation between a text:meta-field to a plug-in is information 
required by all ODF applications and defining it improves interoperability.

Problems occurring by multiple plug-ins using the same named graph are 
possible, but unlikely and negligible as the problem of two different 
RDF node using incidentally the same IRI.

Svante