[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] A bit of synergy this morning?
Hello, The question about how to topic maps and RDF brought me a wave of reflections. Question: Could an RDF "record" be a link? or could an Xlink be an RDF record? At first sight this may not be too significant, but if you think more about it, it brings tremendous advantages. So, let's imagine, for a second if an xlink extended locator would also be an RDF "record". The link would also contain meta-information about the linked resource for instance if I have the following expression: <specifications xlink:type="extended"> <rdf:desciption xlink:type="locator" xlink:href="http://www.w3c.org/xlink"> <relase_date>12/24/99<release_date> <type>christmas gift</type> <description>W3C would be a santa claus for us poor XML developers</description> </rdf:description> </specifications> OK, put as resource description more significant information :-)) but the point here is the following: if an RDF description would also recognize the Xlink attribute for linkage (so that we can replace the rdf:about="http://www.w3c.org/xlink" with xlink:href="http://www.w3c.org/xlink" then the resource description can also be a link. or vise versa. The impacts are: a) more significant links (links that also include meta-information about the linked resource) b) Resources descriptions could be used as links (the commutative reasoning) c) a browser can display a one to many link as a two level context menu as below rdf specifications ---------------------- | W3C documents | | Didier's suggestion | | examples |---------------------- ----------------------| author: Will johnson | | date: 12/24/99 | | description: bla.. | ------------------------ The first menu is...a menu, then when a particular locator is highlighted, a tool tip kind of window is displayed to provide additional information about the link (the meta information about the resource). d) probably a lot more I didn't envisionned. Observation: I discovered something observing the W3C output. It seems that each workgroup creates its own workspace... heu sorry, its own name space and do not re-use the work of others (have you found a lot of name space element re-usage among the WGs?). For example, it would be beneficial is the rdf WG would use the xlink workgroup reference attribute for the resource reference and vise versa. The xlink group can as well take the rdf:about attribute as a resource reference. Anyway, if these group where to talk each other or just exercise their synthetic mind, it would become more obvious that if they mix a bit their mind space... heu sorry their name space they would provide us synergistic constructs. Or maybe that it never occurred to somebody that a resource could be a link or that a link could also be a resource description. Hoops, did I invented something here or did I discovered that workgroups do not talk each other? Cheers Didier PH Martin ---------------------------------------------- Email: martind@n... Conferences: Web New York (http://www.mfweb.com) Book to come soon: XML Pro published by Wrox Press Products: http://www.netfolder.com xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 To unsubscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; unsubscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|