ISSUE-61: Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper

Add vocabulary helper

Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper

State:

POSTPONED

Product:

RDFa 1.1 API

Raised by:

Manu Sporny

Opened on:

2010-11-18

Description:

From TimBL:

Re: Namespace object. No intention to pollute the global namespace. Note python one declares explicitly, in JS I suggest things like this are hung off both a singe rdf object and the graph object, a bit like:

{
var $rdf = document.rdf;
var g = $rdf.graph();

var foaf = g.ns("http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/");
var RDFS = g.ns("http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#");
var dc = vocab("http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/");
var rss = vocab("http://purl.org/rss/1.0/");
var contact = vocab("http://www.w3.org/2000/10/swap/pim/contact#");

...
}

------

This request has come up a number of times. The WG should decide if the current DataContext is enough or if an additional callback-based mechanism for resolving CURIEs would be helpful.

Perhaps something like this:

[NoInterfaceObject]
interface DataContext
{
...
CURIEResolver createResolver(in DOMString prefix);
...
}

[NoInterfaceObject Callback]
interface CURIEResolver
{
DOMString resolve(in DOMString reference);
}

Related Actions Items:

No related actions

Related emails:

1. Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-61: Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper (from ivan@w3.org on 2011-01-13)
2. Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-61: Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper (from nathan@webr3.org on 2011-01-13)
3. Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-61: Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper (from ivan@w3.org on 2011-01-13)
4. Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-61: Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper (from nathan@webr3.org on 2011-01-13)
5. Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-61: Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper (from ivan@w3.org on 2011-01-13)
6. Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-61: Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper (from nathan@webr3.org on 2011-01-13)
7. Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-61: Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper (from ivan@w3.org on 2011-01-13)
8. Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-61: Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper (from msporny@digitalbazaar.com on 2011-01-12)
9. Re: Modularity objection to PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-61 (from msporny@digitalbazaar.com on 2011-01-12)
10. Re: Modularity ojection Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-61: Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper (from nathan@webr3.org on 2011-01-04)
11. Modularity ojection Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-61: Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper (from timbl@w3.org on 2011-01-04)
12. Modularity problem Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-61: Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper (from timbl@w3.org on 2011-01-03)
13. Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-61: Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper (from ivan@w3.org on 2011-01-03)
14. PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-61: Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper (from msporny@digitalbazaar.com on 2011-01-02)
15. Closing RDFa API issues (from msporny@digitalbazaar.com on 2011-01-01)
16. ISSUE-61 (Add vocabulary helper): Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper [RDFa 1.1 API] (from sysbot+tracker@w3.org on 2010-11-18)

Related notes:

No additional notes.

Display change log