[whatwg] RDFa Basics Video (8 minutes)

[Toby A Inkster]

Kristof Zelechovski wrote:

> [...] However, having
> semantic networks and plain text as interleaved alternative streams  
> of the
> same content, which is what the demonstration shows, seems to be too
> vulnerable and error-prone, especially when there is no validator  
> at hand
> that could verify that both streams convey the same information.

Surely if they are kept in separate files, it is far more likely that  
the machine-readable and human-readable data will become out of sync?  
If the machine-readable data is kept near the human-readable data  
(indeed, usually they are not merely *near* each other, but they're  
actually the same thing - e.g. both the names in the examples below),  
then they're likely to be maintained at the same time, and thus be  
more accurate.

> <span about="#jane" instanceof="foaf:Person" property="foaf:name"
> >Jane</span >
> <span about="#jane" property="foaf:loves" resource="#mac"
> >hates</span >
> <span about="#mac" instanceof="foaf:Person" property="foaf:name"
> >Mac</span >.
>
> Ugh.  That really hurt.

I'm not surprised it hurt - that's an overly verbose way of  
expressing that data.

<p about="#jane">
   <span property="foaf:name">Jane</span> hates
   <span rel="foaf:loves">
     <span about="#mac" property="foaf:name">Mac</span>
   </span>
</p>

I've left out the rdf:type information there, but if you really want  
to include it:

<p about="#jane" typeof="foaf:Person">
   <span property="foaf:name">Jane</span> hates
   <span rel="foaf:loves">
     <span about="#mac" typeof="foaf:Person"
       property="foaf:name">Mac</span>
   </span>
</p>

-- 
Toby A Inkster
<mailto:mail at tobyinkster.co.uk>
<http://tobyinkster.co.uk>