Chris Bizer wrote:
> Stefano,
>
> if we would drop fresnel:Styles what would we do with fresnel:label,
> fresnel:value and fresnel:contentAfter?
>
> Would we:
> 1. Move this functionality into the lens.
> 2. Keep it in something seperate, maybe not called style, but which also has
> a domain property.
> 3. Also drop this functionality?
1+2 - If we were to do drop fresnel:Styles, I propose we hang these
other properties off of :PropertyDescription.
(derived from
http://simile.mit.edu/repository/fresnel/trunk/examples/foaf-example-fresnel-simple-core-and-lens-group.n3)
:myDepicts a fresnel:PropertyDescription ;
fresnel:property foaf:depiction ;
fresnel:label "can be seen in" ;
fresnel:value fresnel:image .
:FOAFPersonDefaultLens a fresnel:Lens ;
fresnel:purpose fresnel:defaultLens ;
fresnel:lensDomain foaf:Person ;
fresnel:showProperties (foaf:name foaf:mbox :myDepicts) .
:personsKnowsLens a fresnel:Lens ;
fresnel:lensDomain foaf:Person ;
fresnel:showProperties ( foaf:name
:myDepicts
[ a fresnel:PropertyDescription ;
fresnel:property foaf:knows ;
fresnel:label fresnel:none ;
fresnel:sublens :FOAFPersonDefaultLens ] ).
The major drawback compared to the former solution is in trying to apply
the same property manipulations more broadly since only one
fresnel:property, naming one rdf:Property, can currently be used in a
fresnel:PropertyDescription (as opposed to the full range of selectors
in :styleDomain). Considering fresnel:label, though, I don't think
these manipulations are really that broadly applicable in the first place.
Thoughts?
What precisely are we retaining?
:label (and :LabellingStyles - maybe rename to :LabellingTypes)
:value (and :PropertyValueStyles - maybe rename to :PropertyValueTypes)
:contentNoValue
The remaining :content{First,Last,Before,After} properties seem like
they could be left to styling instead.
--
Ryan Lee ryanlee_at_w3.org
W3C Research Engineer +1.617.253.5327
http://simile.mit.edu/
Received on Tue Apr 26 2005 - 15:08:44 EDT