Comments for gavin.carothers.name

Comment on Prefixes, not that complicated. by Peter Ring

Peter Ring — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 18:24:10 +0000

Thanks goodness for a bit of common sense. Best regards to O-baby.

Comment on Trying to understand Microdata? RDFa? by Ian Hickson

Ian Hickson — Fri, 16 Oct 2009 06:01:27 +0000

I just added this to the spec.

Comment on Prefixes, not that complicated. by your wife

your wife — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 23:56:03 +0000

oh thank goodness you didn’t scan the notes you s]id
y]
]ouw\ *

*you said you would

O-baby has assisted in this comment, I think he wants a computer of his own.

Comment on Trying to understand Microdata? RDFa? by Bruce D'Arcus

Bruce D'Arcus — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 16:15:28 +0000

Ian: on the use case, this is actually a good example of what I’ve previously said about bibliographic data. He’s using the FRBR vocabulary, which allows you to model the relations between, in this case, a work (the intellectual content), how it’s expressed (text, audio, etc.), and its specific (often physical) embodiment. So Amazon may sell fifty different translations of “Tom Sawyer”, each of which may have various hard cover and soft cover versions. This allows you to actually establish those connections, which can be really useful for users try to find any particular product (book) to purchase.

If you were to use a flat bibtex approach, there’d be no way you could indicate this; it’d just be completely separate items.

A related issue: the BIBO vocabulary I’ve worked on is easy to integrate into this more complex FRBR view. For example, in RDF, you could say the individual book manifestations are also bibo Book instances. So rather than having two completely separate models, you can plug them together, and easily merge the data.

Can one assign more than one item type in microdata?

Comment on Trying to understand Microdata? RDFa? by Bruce D'Arcus

Bruce D'Arcus — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 15:43:44 +0000

Minor correction on your RDF modeling: the new dcterms creator property should be either a URI, or a blank node.

Comment on Trying to understand Microdata? RDFa? by Jeni Tennison

Jeni Tennison — Sat, 22 Aug 2009 15:30:08 +0000

You’ve probably already worked this out, but you can use the meta element to provide literal values for properties without having those values embedded within the page.

Comment on Understanding Microdata, now with more understanding by k.

k. — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 17:24:25 +0000

I now have even less understanding than I did before. I did not think that was possible, apparently it is.

Comment on Trying to understand Microdata? RDFa? by Ian Hickson

Ian Hickson — Fri, 14 Aug 2009 05:02:14 +0000

Could I convince you to forward this blog post to me by e-mail? ian@hixie.ch

Alternatively, you can forward it to the WHATWG mailing list: http://www.whatwg.org/mailing-list#specs

Either way, having this by e-mail would be really helpful in improving the spec.

Here's what the whole Turtle block you quote above, recast as microdata (and using slightly different markup to make better use of HTML, though that isn't necessary to use Microdata):

 
  
  
   Title
   Just a Geek
   By
   Wil Wheaton
   Format
   
    
    
    Print
   
   
    
    
    Ebook

Can I use this example in the spec? Real world examples would indeed make this much better to understand.

What's the use case for marking this up, by the way? I'm always curious how people are using RDF in the wild.

There's some tools for Microdata, though not many since it only started existing a few months ago.

One tool is Philip Taylor's:
http://philip.html5.org/demos/microdata/demo.html

Another is James Graham's:
http://james.html5.org/microdata/

If I paste the markup above into Philip's tool, it outputs the following RDF:

@prefix rdf:  .
@prefix xhv:  .
@prefix dct:  .
@prefix c:  .


  rdf:type  ;
  dct:title "Just a Geek" ;
  dct:creator "Wil Wheaton" ;
    ;
    .


  rdf:type  ;
  dct:type  .


  rdf:type  ;
  dct:type  .

<>
  xhv:item  .