Hi Michael,
Would it be a partition by levels [1] then?
That's an interesting document...I've never seen that before. Thanks. Well, using the terminology from that document, I'd see it as the one above the one you link to--modules. So, let's pretend that we call the attribute and parsing document RDFa-core. Let's also say that we have a document for HTML that says things like '@rel maps to @property', and '@href maps to @resource' and '@title maps to a triple with a predicate of rdfs:label', and so on. If that document was called HTML-RDF (since to be exact, it's not about RDFa, but about RDF) then we now have two modules. I would then say that RDFa-for-HTML is comprised of these two modules--the core attributes in RDFa-core, and the langauge-specific interpretations in HTML-RDF. Do you think that makes sense? Regards, Mark PS I'm aware also that we could define the language-specific rules in terms of GRDDL, but one step at a time. :) -- Mark Birbeck, formsPlayer [EMAIL PROTECTED] | +44 (0) 20 7689 9232 http://www.formsPlayer.com | http://internet-apps.blogspot.com standards. innovation.
