Hello Manu, all
Manu I think you need to explain that RDFa is a way of expressing
semantics in html, not just a way of expressing RDF annotations in html
Manu Sporny wrote:
Ben Ward wrote:
It will take a couple of weeks to give examples of how this will all
work, but I wanted to get feedback from this community before
proceeding. We have a fantastic opportunity in front of us now - who in
this community thinks that we should work with the W3C on this endeavor?
I'm not sure I completely see the benefit in this, and seeing your
examples would be very helpful in getting a better idea of what you're
proposing.
I'll get a set of examples written up soon, then.
From your bullet points, it seems to suggest taking
microformat vocabularies and expressing them in RDFa, rather than HTML?
It seems redundant for publishers.
No, the markup would still happen in HTML, using Microformat properties,
but instead of using @class, we MAY (not MUST) use @typeof, @property,
and @content (in the case of machine-readable data) to express
Microformats.
Its interesting to point out that most people who publish Microformats,
are not really expressing any semantics at all, @class doesn't expresses
any semantics without meta data profiles and most publishers do not use
them, yes some search engines can pick up hcards and calendar events
but really that's about it. any other Microformats are Ignored mostly.
The key being that these attributes are specifically designed to contain
semantic data. Here's a brief example showing how we could get rid of
the ABBR design problem by re-using RDFa's @content attribute. Note that
this would work in HTML 4.01, XHTML1.1 and XHTML2:
<div typeof="haudio">
<span property="title">Start Wearing Purple</span> by
<span property="contributor">Gogol Bordello</span>
<span property="published" content="20020514">May 14th, 2002</span>
</div>
That is a good example of how microformats could be used in RDFa
everything (to me) seems to be in the right place.
@typeof can include any root Microformat Class names
@property is any Microformat Property name
@rel is any microformat rel value
Microformats Map pretty well in this way
However, I do have a somewhat related issue that you might consider part
of this effort. Some discussions I've had lately revealed usefulness in
being able to _map_ microformats into RDF, for the purpose of combining
microformats with other RDF vocabularies in a back-end somewhere (so,
conversion for processing, rather than publishing. Publishing remains in
HTML where it is most effective).
Publishing would stay in HTML, where it is most effective. Nobody is
suggesting that it move elsewhere - RDFa follows the same principles as
Microformats in this case.
As for the mapping between uF/RDF Vocabularies, I started a page to do
just that back in October 2007:
http://wiki.digitalbazaar.com/en/Mapping-ufs-to-rdfa
Want me to move it to Microformats.org?
I think you should Manu, so the rest of the community can read your most
excellent work :-)
I'm told that RDF ‘versions’ of vcard and icalendar are out of date
compared to the microformats.
I don't think they are, but could be mistaken...
The last update to VCARD was on 22 February 2001:
http://www.w3.org/TR/vcard-rdf
and the vocabulary:
http://www.w3.org/2001/vcard-rdf/3.0#
The last update to iCalendar was on 29 September 2005
http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfcal/
and the vocabulary:
http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal#
As such, it strikes me that rather than
maintaining duplicate specifications, it would instead make sense to
develop a set of standard transformations so that any microformat can be
transformed from HTML to RDF, without requiring duplicate effort to
maintain another spec. This I'm sure would relate closely to GRDDL,
since that already deals with transformation.
Yes, agreed, that would be useful.
Agreed.
Note, I'm talking about mapping rules, not separate specs. For example,
we have the ‘jCard’ page on the wiki, which I still feel should be more
generic ‘JSON Mapping Rules’ page that can cover parsing from any
format, not just hcard.
We're also working on that in our company, but internally for now. There
is the issue of a generic object representation format for semantic data
objects. We have a generalized RDF-based representation for RDFa and
Microformats now... but didn't think this community would be interested
in such a solution. Should a wiki-page be started on various "JSON
Mapping Rules" between uF/RDFa to JSON?
-- manu
Best Wishes
Martin McEvoy
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
_______________________________________________
microformats-discuss mailing list
microformats-discuss@microformats.org
http://microformats.org/mailman/listinfo/microformats-discuss
