office-collab — archive

[Dennis Hamilton]

Related to today's call and discussion of the RDF, I wanted to clarify some things: 1. In the content.xml file, the only use of RDF is as RDFa. That is, it is done only using attributes (and not all of the RDFa ones are usable). Since you can only have one particular RDFa attribute on any element that allows for it, there are ways to use <span>-type elements to introduce more of them. (Having reification via the RDFa provisions strikes me as unlikely.) 2. In the separate RDF in an ODF 1.2 package (RDF that provides semantic information about the XML parts that constitute the ODF document as such), RDF/XML is used. 3. There is, of course, nothing to prevent the introduction of RDF/XML elements as children of elements in the content.xml (and other) XML documents of the ODF. Under the current schema and conformance targets, these are foreign elements and treated as extensions. (It appears that this is not allowed in manifest.xml since the rules about extensions and foreign elements were not extended to that case. The top-level manifest.rdf might have some bearing on this case, but it is difficult to know for sure.) 4. In the current ODF specification, there is nothing on whether and how the metadata carried in these RDF representations is made known to the user of an ODF consumer and how its connection to the ODF document content material is maintained. Whatever there is about coordinated change-tracking between the ODF document and the RDF tied to it needs to somehow recognize that there is considerable variability here (and the RDF is new to ODF 1.2 and it is not clear to me what level of interoperable implementations there are at this time). I just wanted to add some context for the discussion about how RDF might be involved as the subject of change tracking. - Dennis