On Mar 12, 11:31 am, Yaron Koren <[email protected]> wrote:
> Well, it might be worth adding to Semantic Forms the Javascript-enabled
> "starting text that goes away when you click inside the box" inputs that you
> see a lot on the web a lot; though that's a different feature from the one
> you're asking about. For namespaces, if a field should always have a certain
> namespace, I think it's better to not have the field contain that namespace
> at all, but instead have the template automatically add it.
Agreed. it's good practice in any event to have the template check for
a proper namespace.
This request for no-default-arg is not a show-stopper for me, so I can
drop it if you want.
> I don't know what property cardinalities mean, but, as I noted before, you
> can always make certain fields mandatory. The whole idea of requiring at
> least one non-empty field seems odd. Let's say you have a template (and
> form) for countries that contains, say, two fields: a population and a
> capital. What's the use of requiring the user to enter at least one of them?
> If you can live without one or the other, why not live without both?
Attachment of a given property to a resource implies that the resource
is an instance of a class. This is quite standard OWL practice -
classes defined by Restriction. To use your example, if one adds a
country_population property to a page certainly implies that the page
is a Country. This is the opposite of how you're thinking about the
sequence. For you, it's "class implies property(s)". For me, it's
"property(s) imply class". For you, it's page has a class has (many)
properties. For me it's page has (many) properties, properties are
bound to classes, so page has (many) classes. This is part of the
essence of what's called "multiple inheritance". I'm not knocking your
approach, I only want to make mine work.
Again, the sf extension now can cause problems: one for the user
(because, under Edit Source, meaningless template calls are seen), and
one for performance (because empty template calls can often result in
no action performed). I sure wish you could be cooperative about this
request for no-null-call, as it affects both system performance and
users. Unlike no-default-arg, no-null-call *is* important to me.
> MographWiki in fact uses SMW (that's where the data comes from), and its
> performance seems fine to me. I don't see how the lack of a form is
> relevant.
Hmm, I was noting that "London" itself is not a semantic object
because no forms are involved. Its code (a single template call) is
not a good counter-example to mine which features a form & multiple
template-calls.. apples to oranges!
Thanks.
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Semantic Forms" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/semantic-forms?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
