Chris Bizer wrote:
> I have also added some additional features to the style ontology:
>
> 1. A Resource Box for being able to style the complete space used to display
> an
> instance.
>
> I think such a box is really useful for defining different background colors
> for resources of different classes or for specifying borders. See
> http://simile.mit.edu/repository/fresnel/examples/foaf-example-fresnel-simpl
> e-core-and-lens-group.n3 for an example.
Agreed.
> So, our complete box model would look like this:
> # 1. Container Box
> # The container surrounding all displayed resources. A container box
> contains a set of resource boxes.
We already talked about this, but I would liek a better word for this
top-level box. Container is just too generic and fails to convey the
meaning of this root box.
> # 2. Resource Box
> # The resource box surrounds all properties of a single resources. The box
> contains a set of property boxes.
> # 3. Property Box
> # The property box surrounds the area that is used to display a single
> property. It contains one label box and a set of value boxes.
> # 4. Label Box
> # The label box contains the label of a property.
> # 5. Value Box
> # The value box contains one property value.
> # If several lenses are used together (fresnel:sublens) then a value box can
> contain another complete Fresnel box model.
Here I have a slight concern with the whole box model. I understand that
we can indeed repeat the full box hierarchy starting from what you
called a container. But for me the container box that would appear here
(1. container box) is slightly different from the top-level root
container associated with the page (which is closer to the body element
of an HTML page, as opposed to other container boxes that would be more
like div elements). Just a question of vocabulary though... and I don;t
really have any offer to make right now.
> 2. I also added the possibility to style classes, which is important for
> mixed content. Example:
>
> ex:gifImage rdf:type rdfs:Class ;
> fresnel:displayAs fresnel:image ;
> fresnel:styleGroup :groupOne .
>
> What do you think?
This seems necessary indeed. Though I hope we won't keep adding new
vocabulary items at the same pace.
> 3. Going through the CSS Spec, I also added some more selector
> pseudo-classes
> like :link and :hover and some of their output media types like :screen and
> :print as style purposes.
>
> What do you think?
I would have hoped we could delegate these :link/:hover/:visited
constructs to the CSS layer, but as these are actually part of the
selectors in CSS (which we don't have here), I do not see any other
possibility than what you propose.
As for the purpose controlloed vocab items, that's fine with me. They
should probably not be direct values of purpose though (we might want
something more structured as purpose values).
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 Sat Mar 12 2005 - 09:49:44 EST