OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office-metadata message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


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


Elias Torres wrote:
> "Bruce D'Arcus" <bdarcus@gmail.com> wrote on 05/11/2007 09:37:40 AM:
>
>   
>> On May 11, 2007, at 8:47 AM, Svante Schubert wrote:
>>
>>     
>>> 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.
>>>       
>> For the citation case, why not:
>>
>> <odf:Element odf:idref="id" rdf:about="uri:elementURI"/>
>>
>> <b:Citation rdf:about="uri:elementURI">
>>    ...
>> </b:Citation>
>>     
The b:Citation element is in the metadata manifest as well, right?
How much of the citation data stored in the metadata manifest, or is it 
just the rdf:type?
If it is just a rdf:type called b:citation, it could be written as well 
beyond the odf:Element itself.

<odf:Element odf:idref="id" rdf:about="uri:elementURI">
   <rdf:type rdf:resource="b:Citation"/>
</odf:Element>

Do I understand it correctly, you just prefer to have the rdf:type(s) directly in the element, instead of some indirection using a NamedGraph, which refers to the rdf:types of the metadata file(s) using the IRI of a named RDF graph.

The rdf:type on the odf:Element seems easier to understand, although the 
rdf:types would be rewritten for each element. But this would work as well.
>> <odf:MetaDataFile rdf:about="http://someNamedGraph";>
>>     <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://opendocument.org/Citation"/>
>> </odf:MetaDataFile>
>>
>> ...?
>>
>> E.g. type the field itself.
>>
>>     
> Exactly what I suggested to Svante you would do. 
Elias, I understood your suggestion that the odf:MetaDataFile takes the 
elementURI as NamedGraph

<odf:MetaDataFile rdf:about="uri:elementURI">
    <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://opendocument.org/Citation"/>
</odf:MetaDataFile>

That would have the drawback that every element would have at least one 
metadata file.
A lot of metadata files in case of citations..
> I stated that you have a
> need and you would spec out what your implementors would do. You are
> deciding to do solve your need via rdf:types. What we provide is the
> extensible mechanism (thanks to RDF) to do so. Now, Svante wants the
> general solution to that problem (which I believe exists and its needed)
> but I think we would be going outside our responsibility and scope. I
> suggested to Svante that it is a separate spec built on top of ODF metadata
> that he and KOffice and others can agree.
>   
> I think we have a really good and tight (yet general) specification. Any
> more specific ontology classes and predicates will be looking for trouble
> and decisions that we might wish left for a later time.
>   
Elias do you believe a single ODF application is not in need of finding 
the binding between a text:meta-field and it's RDF/XML file(s)?
In case every application is in need of making this binding persistent, 
would it not improve the interoperability to address it in the standard?

Svante


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]