Ryan Lee wrote:
> # For any resource selected via a group
> :groupResourceHook rdfs:domain fresnel:Group .
>
> # For any predicate selected via a group
> :groupPropertyHook rdfs:domain fresnel:Group .
>
> # For any object value selected via a graph
> :groupValueHook rdfs:domain fresnel:Group .
>
> # For any output label
> :labelHook rdfs:domain fresnel:Group .
>
> # For resources selected by a lens
> :lensResourceHook rdfs:domain fresnel:Lens .
>
> # For predicates
> :propertyHook rdfs:domain fresnel:Transform .
>
> # For values of predicates
> :valueHook rdfs:domain fresnel:Transform .
>
> Example Fresnel:
>
> [[[
>
> my:peopleGroup a fresnel:Group ;
> fresnel:groupResourceHook "my-fr-resources"^^fresnel:css-class ;
> fresnel:groupPropertyHook "my-fr-properties"^^fresnel:css-class ;
> fresnel:groupLiteralHook "my-fr-values"^^fresnel:css-class ;
> fresnel:labelHook "my-fr-labels"^^fresnel:css-class .
>
> my:peopleLabelLens a fresnel:Lens ;
> fresnel:lensDomain foaf:Person ;
> fresnel:purpose fresnel:labelLens ;
> fresnel:showProperties foaf:name .
>
> my:peopleLens a fresnel:Lens ;
> fresnel:lensDomain foaf:Person ;
> fresnel:purpose fresnel:defaultLens ;
> fresnel:group my:peopleGroup ;
> fresnel:showProperties ( foaf:name
> foaf:mbox
> [ a fresnel:PropertyDetails ;
> fresnel:property foaf:knows ;
> fresnel:sublens my:friendsLens ] ) .
>
> my:friendsLens a fresnel:Lens ;
> fresnel:lensDomain foaf:Person ;
> fresnel:group my:peopleGroup ;
> fresnel:showProperties ( foaf:name
> foaf:mbox ) .
>
> my:knowsTransform a fresnel:Transform ;
> fresnel:transformProperty foaf:knows ;
> fresnel:propertyHook "foaf-knows"^^fresnel:css-class ;
> fresnel:valueHook "foaf-known"^^fresnel:css-class ;
> fresnel:valueSeparator [ fresnel:contentAfter "|" ].
>
> ]]]
As Chris, I'm very happy with the whole proposal. A few comments:
1) I'm a little worried about fresnel:Transform's "domain". Looking at
your example, it looks like you declare a Transform globally, and that
you define its scope/domain only by specifying
fresnel:transformProperty, giving the name of the property. Meaning that
it applies to all such properties, no matter the context of their
display (e.g., by which lens are they displayed). However, I can very
well imagine that for the same property type, people would like
different transforms to happen depending on the context (e.g. what lens
is displaying this property). Using FSL selectors as the value of
fresnel:transformProperty only solves part of the problem (it puts
constraints on the property's context (in the RDF graph), but not on the
presentation context (what lens/group is currently used to display this
bit of information). Or maybe I have missed something and you can do
something like that, maybe using groups, e.g. by associating the
Transform toa group?
> The box model is done away with. There is no presumption that, say,an
> XHTML tree is structured with the property element nested inside its
> subject resource element.
2) Agreed.
3) I'm also fine with just considering symbols in core (for class/style
hooks)
4) About terminology:
- I don't really like "hook". Even if it describes the role of this
thing well, it sounds too low-level/technical to me. However I don't
have a strong feeling about this.
- fresnel:style vs. fresnel:transform: I'm in favor of transform.
Everything is considered as "styling" by CSS, including
content-before/after, etc., but they are not actually using a specific
terminology to refer to this part of the language. We are. And
considering this I find "style" to be misleading. Looking quickly at the
CSS 2.1 WD, other terms come to mind: "fresnel:Content",
"fresnel:Formatting". Just suggestions, I'm not sure this actually fits
better.
Emmanuel
--
Emmanuel Pietriga
INRIA Futurs - Projet In Situ tel : +33 1 69 15 34 66
Bat 490, Université Paris-Sud fax : +33 1 69 15 65 86
91405 ORSAY Cedex FRANCE http://www.lri.fr/~pietriga
Received on Wed Jun 15 2005 - 12:10:51 EDT