Re: [office-metadata] Re: Splitting View and Model

[Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg <Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM>]

Hi Bruce,

Bruce D'Arcus wrote:
> 
> On Dec 20, 2006, at 2:03 AM, Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - 
> Hamburg wrote:
> 
> 
>> This explains the reason for asking my questions regarding your proposal.
>> Its my understanding that the metadata in your proposal is inline in 
>> the content. Please
>> correct me if I'm wrong.
> 
> My argument is that in general we want the metadata apart from the 
> content, but:
> 
> a) to properly reference even resource descriptions (say in a field) we 
> need a generic mechanism to do that which requires more than just xml:id

Can you provide an example for this?

> 
> b) there may be cases (perhaps Elias' demo today) where we need the 
> triples themselves -- which is to say properties that relate to subjects 
> others than the document -- in-content,and in those cases it makes sense 
> to allow for a few metadata attributes to do this.

I will listen to Elias demo today. Maybe it gets clear to me why this is required.
However, I don't intend to become a SC member. I only want to understand what the
issue is to help to resolve it.

> 
> In other words, this is why I call it the "hybrid" approach.
> 
>> Since we separate content and styles and content and metadata already, 
>> I would
>> like to understand where the benefit is of not doing the same for 
>> metadata about other
>> subjects than the document.
> 
> If we have this:
> 
> <text:link
>     meta:property="http://ex.net/client";
>     meta:resource="http://ex.net/contacts/1";>Jane Doe</text:link>
> 
> ... the actual description (say a vCard representation) is apart from 
> the content, but we still have *some* metadata there. The string "Jane 
> Doe" is just a label (not per se metadata).

Let's see if I did understand that. You have Jane Doe's vCard somewhere. And the two
attributes meta:property and meta:resource do not specify metadata by themselves, but 
"duplicate" them to get a link to the vCard entry?

> 
> This is what I think Elias means by the in-context metadata idea. It's 
> similar to your description of fields.

Maybe. But your example is slightly different than that of Elias. However,
I think we should postpone our discussion until the SC call.

Michael