This document is also available in these non-normative formats: Diff from previous Working Draft , PostScript version , and PDF version .
Copyright
©
2007-2011
W3C
®
(
MIT
,
ERCIM
,
Keio
),
All
Rights
Reserved.
W3C
liability
,
trademark
and
This
document
use
rules
apply.
is
licensed
under
a
Creative
Commons
Attribution
3.0
License
.
The
current
Web
is
primarily
made
up
of
an
enormous
number
of
documents
that
have
been
created
using
HTML.
These
documents
contain
significant
amounts
of
structured
data,
which
data.
For
example,
structured
data
about
people,
events,
places,
recipes
and
licenses
are
readily
available
in
these
documents.
This
data
is
largely
unavailable
to
browsers,
tools
and
applications.
other
applications
that
use
the
Web.
RDFa Core enables publishers and developers to express structured data in Web documents such that browsers, tools and other applications can easily extract the data.
When
publishers
can
express
this
data
more
completely,
and
when
tools
can
read
it,
a
new
world
of
user
functionality
becomes
available,
letting
users
transfer
structured
data
available.
People,
places,
events
and
recipes
can
be
transferred
between
browsers,
applications
and
web
sites,
and
allowing
browsing
applications
to
improve
the
user
experience:
sites.
The
Web
experience
can
be
improved:
an
event
on
a
web
page
can
be
directly
imported
into
a
user's
desktop
mobile
phone
calendar;
a
license
on
a
document
can
be
detected
so
that
users
can
be
informed
of
their
usage
rights
automatically;
are
understood;
a
photo's
creator,
camera
setting
information,
resolution,
location
and
topic
can
be
published
as
easily
as
the
original
photo
itself,
enabling
structured
search
and
sharing.
RDFa
Core
is
a
specification
for
attributes
to
express
structured
data
in
any
markup
language.
The
embedded
data
already
available
in
the
markup
language
(e.g.,
XHTML)
can
often
be
reused
by
the
RDFa
markup,
so
that
publishers
don't
need
to
repeat
significant
data
in
the
document
content.
The
underlying
abstract
representation
is
RDF
[
RDF-PRIMER
],
which
lets
publishers
build
their
own
vocabulary,
extend
others,
and
evolve
their
vocabulary
with
maximal
interoperability
over
time.
The
expressed
structure
is
closely
tied
to
the
data,
so
that
rendered
data
can
be
copied
and
pasted
along
with
its
relevant
structure.
The
rules
for
interpreting
the
data
are
generic,
so
that
there
is
no
need
for
different
rules
for
different
formats;
this
allows
authors
and
publishers
of
data
to
define
their
own
formats
without
having
to
update
software,
register
formats
via
a
central
authority,
or
worry
that
two
formats
may
interfere
with
each
other.
RDFa
shares
some
of
the
same
goals
with
microformats
[
MICROFORMATS
].
Whereas
microformats
specify
both
a
syntax
for
embedding
structured
data
into
HTML
documents
and
a
vocabulary
of
specific
terms
for
each
microformat,
RDFa
specifies
only
a
syntax
and
relies
on
independent
specification
of
terms
(often
called
vocabularies
or
taxonomies)
by
others.
RDFa
allows
terms
from
multiple
independently-developed
vocabularies
to
be
freely
intermixed
and
is
designed
such
that
the
language
can
be
parsed
without
knowledge
of
the
specific
vocabulary
being
used.
This
document
is
a
detailed
syntax
specification
for
RDFa,
aimed
at:
For those looking for an introduction to the use of RDFa and some real-world examples, please consult the RDFa Primer .
First,
if
it
is
important
to
understand
that
there
are
two
levels
of
RDFa
markup;
Basic
and
Advanced.
The
Basic
markup
is
meant
for
beginners
and
those
that
do
not
need
any
of
the
features
provided
by
the
Advanced
markup.
Also
note
that
there
are
Basic
Processors
and
Advanced
Processors.
To
ensure
that
RDFa
markup
is
readable
by
all
processors,
use
the
Basic
markup
as
long
as
it
meets
your
publishing
needs.
If you are not familiar with either RDFa or RDF, and simply want to add RDFa to your documents, then you may find the RDFa Primer [ RDFA-PRIMER ] to be a better introduction.
If you are already familiar with RDFa, and you want to examine the processing rules — perhaps to create an RDFa Processor — then you'll find the Processing Model section of most interest. It contains an overview of each of the processing steps, followed by more detailed sections, one for each rule.
If you are not familiar with RDFa, but you are familiar with RDF, then you might find reading the Syntax Overview useful, before looking at the Processing Model since it gives a range of examples of markup that use RDFa. Seeing some examples first should make reading the processing rules easier.
If you are not familiar with RDF, then you might want to take a look at the section on RDF Terminology before trying to do too much with RDFa. Although RDFa is designed to be easy to author — and authors don't need to understand RDF to use it — anyone writing applications that consume RDFa will need to understand RDF. There is a lot of material about RDF on the web, and a growing range of tools that support RDFa, this document only contains enough background on RDF to make the goals of RDFa more clear.
RDFa is a way of expressing RDF -style relationships using simple attributes in existing markup languages such as HTML. RDF is fully internationalized, and permits the use of Internationalized Resource Identifiers, or IRIs. You will see the term 'IRI' used throughout this specification. Even if you are not familiar with the term IRI, you probably have seen the term 'URI' or 'URL'. IRIs are an extension of URIs that permits the use of characters outside those of plain ASCII. RDF allows the use of these characters, and so does RDFa. This specification has been careful to use the correct term, IRI, to make it clear that this is the case.
This
section
describes
the
status
of
this
document
at
the
time
is
merely
a
public
working
draft
of
its
publication.
Other
documents
may
supersede
this
document.
A
list
a
potential
specification.
It
has
no
official
standing
of
current
W3C
publications
any
kind
and
does
not
represent
the
latest
revision
support
or
consensus
of
this
technical
report
can
be
found
in
the
W3C
technical
reports
index
at
http://www.w3.org/TR/.
any
standards
organisation.
This version reflects changes made as a result of comments received during a second Last Call period. That document was widely reviewed and the Working Group has made a small number of improvements and clarifications as a result. The Working Group believes that all comments received during the last call have been addressed.
This is a revision of RDFa Syntax 1.0 [ RDFA-SYNTAX ]. Once development is complete, if accepted by the W3C membership, this document will supersede the previous Recommendation . There are a number of substantive differences between this version and its predecessor, including:
A sample test harness is available. This set of tests is not intended to be exhaustive. Users may find the tests to be useful examples of RDFa usage.
This section is non-normative.
RDF/XML [ RDF-SYNTAX ] provides sufficient flexibility to represent all of the abstract concepts in RDF [ RDF-CONCEPTS ]. However, it presents a number of challenges; first it is difficult or impossible to validate documents that contain RDF/XML using XML Schemas or DTDs, which therefore makes it difficult to import RDF/XML into other markup languages. Whilst newer schema languages such as RELAX NG [ RELAXNG-SCHEMA ] do provide a way to validate documents that contain arbitrary RDF/XML, it will be a while before they gain wide support.
Second, even if one could add RDF/XML directly into an XML dialect like XHTML, there would be significant data duplication between the rendered data and the RDF/XML structured data. It would be far better to add RDF to a document without repeating the document's existing data. For example, an XHTML document that explicitly renders its author's name in the text—perhaps as a byline on a news site—should not need to repeat this name for the RDF expression of the same concept: it should be possible to supplement the existing markup in such a way that it can also be interpreted as RDF.
Another reason for aligning the rendered data with the structured data is that it is highly beneficial to express the web data's structure 'in context'; as users often want to transfer structured data from one application to another, sometimes to or from a non-web-based application, the user experience can be enhanced. For example, information about specific rendered data could be presented to the user via 'right-clicks' on an item of interest.
In the past, many attributes were 'hard-wired' directly into the markup language to represent specific concepts. For example, in XHTML 1.1 [ XHTML11 ] and HTML [ HTML401 ] there is @cite ; the attribute allows an author to add information to a document which is used to indicate the origin of a quote.
However, these 'hard-wired' attributes make it difficult to define a generic process for extracting metadata from any document since an RDFa Processor would need to know about each of the special attributes. One motivation for RDFa has been to devise a means by which documents can be augmented with metadata in a general, rather than hard-wired, manner. This has been achieved by creating a fixed set of attributes and parsing rules, but allowing those attributes to contain properties from any of a number of the growing range of available RDF vocabularies. In most cases the values of those properties are the information that is already in an author's document.
RDFa alleviates the pressure on markup language designers to anticipate all the structural requirements users of their language might have, by outlining a new syntax for RDF that relies only on attributes. By adhering to the concepts and rules in this specification, language designers can import RDFa into their environment with a minimum of hassle and be confident that semantic data will be extractable from their documents by conforming processors.
This section is non-normative.
The following examples are intended to help readers who are not familiar with RDFa to quickly get a sense of how it works. For a more thorough introduction, please read the RDFa Primer [ RDFA-PRIMER ].
In RDF, it is common for people to shorten vocabulary terms via abbreviated IRIs that use a 'prefix' and a 'reference'. This mechanism is explained in detail in the section titled Compact URI Expressions . The examples throughout this document assume that the following vocabulary prefixes have been defined:
| bibo: | http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/ |
| cc: | http://creativecommons.org/ns# |
| dbp: | http://dbpedia.org/property/ |
| dbp-owl: | http://dbpedia.org/ontology/ |
| dbr: | http://dbpedia.org/resource/ |
| dc: | http://purl.org/dc/terms/ |
| ex: | http://example.org/ |
| foaf: | http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/ |
| rdf: | http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns# |
| rdfa: | http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfa# |
| rdfs: | http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema# |
| xhv: | http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab# |
| xsd: | http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema# |
In
some
of
the
examples
below
we
have
used
IRIs
with
fragment
identifiers
that
are
local
to
the
document
containing
the
RDFa
fragment
identifiers
shown
(e.g.,
'
about="#me"
').
This
idiom,
which
is
also
used
in
RDF/XML
[
RDF-SYNTAX-GRAMMAR
]
and
other
RDF
serializations,
gives
a
simple
way
to
'mint'
new
IRIs
for
entities
described
by
RDFa
and
therefore
contributes
considerably
to
the
expressive
power
of
RDFa.
Unfortunately,
this
practice
is
not
at
present
covered
by
the
media
type
registrations
that
govern
the
meaning
of
fragment
identifiers
(see
section
3.5
of
the
URI
specification
[
RFC3986
],
[
RFC3023
],
and
[
RFC2854
]).
For
more
information
about
fragment
identifier
semantics,
see
[
WEBARCH
]
section
3.2.1.
RDFa makes use of a number of commonly found attributes, as well as providing a few new ones. Attributes that already exist in widely deployed languages (e.g., HTML) have the same meaning they always did, although their syntax has been slightly modified in some cases. For example, in (X)HTML there is no clear way to add new @rel values; RDFa sets out to explicitly solve this problem, and does so by allowing IRIs as values. It also introduces the concepts of terms and ' compact URI expressions ' — referred to as CURIEs in this document — which allow a full IRI value to be expressed succinctly.
The RDFa attributes are split into two categories; Basic and Advanced.
For
a
complete
list
more
thorough
description
of
the
RDFa
attribute
names
and
syntax,
see
the
Attributes
and
Syntax
.
section.
There are two types of RDFa markup that you can use; Basic and Advanced. The basic markup is designed for beginners and those that want to keep their structured data markup simple. This section outlines a few examples written with RDFa Basic markup.
In
HTML,
authors
can
include
metadata
and
relationships
concerning
the
current
document
by
using
the
meta
and
link
elements.
For
example,
the
author
of
the
page
along
with
the
pages
preceding
and
following
the
current
page
can
be
expressed
using
the
link
and
meta
elements:
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<title>Page 7</title>
<meta name="author" content="Mark Birbeck" />
<link rel="prev" href="page6.html" />
<link rel="next" href="page8.html" />
</head>
<body>...</body>
</html>
RDFa makes use of this concept, enhancing it with the ability to make use of other vocabularies by using full IRIs:
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<title>My home-page</title>
<meta property="http://purl.org/dc/terms/creator" content="Mark Birbeck" />
<link rel="" href="http://www.example.com/#us" />
<link rel="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/topic" href="http://www.example.com/about#me" />
</head>
<body>...</body>
</html>
Because
using
full
IRIs
like
those
above
can
be
cumbersome,
RDFa
also
permits
the
use
of
compact
URI
expressions
so
an
author
can
use
a
shorthand
to
reference
terms
in
multiple
vocabularies.
Note
that
in
RDFa
Basic,
one
can
only
use
the
prefixes
defined
in
the
Default
RDFa
Profile
for
the
Host
Language.
The
Dublin
Core
(
dc
)
and
Friend-of-a-Friend
(
foaf
)
are
two
of
these
pre-defined
vocabularies:
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" ><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <title>My home-page</title> <meta property="dc:creator" content="Mark Birbeck" /><link rel="" href="http://www.example.com/#us" /><link rel="foaf:topic" href="http://www.example.com/about#me" /> </head> <body>...</body> </html>
RDFa
Basic
supports
the
use
of
@rel
and
@rev
on
any
element.
This
is
even
more
useful
with
the
addition
of
support
for
different
vocabularies:
element:
This document is licensed under the<a<a rel="cc:license" href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/"> Creative Commons By-NC-ND License </a>.
Not only can IRIs in the document be re-used to provide metadata, but so can inline text when used with @property :
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" ><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head><title>Jo's Friends and Family Blog</title></head> <body> <p> I'm holding<span > </span>,<span property="ical:summary">one last summer Barbecue</span>, on September 16th at 4pm. </p> </body> </html>
In many cases a block of markup will contain a number of properties that relate to the same item; it's possible with RDFa to indicate an IRI for the item using @about and the type of that item using @typeof :
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head><title>Jo's Friends and Family Blog</title></head>
<body>
<p about="#bbq" typeof="ical:Vevent">
I'm holding
<span property="ical:summary">one last summer Barbecue</span>.
</p>
</body>
</html>
If
some
displayed
text
is
different
to
the
actual
'value'
value
it
represents,
a
more
precise
precise,
machine-readable
value
can
be
added,
which
can
optionally
include
@datatype
added
using
@content
:
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" prefix="cal: http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/ical# ><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head><title>Jo's Friends and Family Blog</title></head> <body><p><p about="#bbq" typeof="ical:Vevent"> I'm holding<span property="cal:summary"><span property="ical:summary"> one last summer Barbecue </span>, on<span ><span property="ical:dtstart" content="2015-09-16T16:00:00-05:00"> September 16th at 4pm </span>. </p> </body> </html>
In
many
cases
A
simple
way
of
defining
a
block
portion
of
markup
a
document
using
terms
from
a
specific
vocabulary
is
to
use
@vocab
to
define
a
default
vocabulary
IRI.
For
example,
to
use
FOAF
terms:
<div vocab="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" about="#me"> My name is <span property="name">John Doe</span> and my blog is called <a rel="homepage" href="http://example.org/blog/">Understanding Semantics</a>. </div>
The
example
above
will
contain
produce
the
following
triples,
expressed
here
in
Turtle
syntax:
@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> . <#me> foaf:name "John Doe" ; foaf:homepage <http://example.org/blog/> .
At
times,
developers
will
find
themselves
requiring
more
than
just
the
minimum
set
of
features
found
in
RDFa
Basic.
Creating
vocabulary
bundles,
rebinding
prefixes,
and
setting
datatypes
are
just
a
number
few
of
properties
that
relate
to
the
same
item;
it's
possible
with
features
provided
by
RDFa
Advanced
markup.
RDFa
Basic
allows
you
to
indicate
shorten
URIs
and
use
compact
URI
expressions
as
long
as
the
type
of
prefixes
are
included
in
the
Default
RDFa
Profile
for
the
Host
Language.
RDFa
Advanced
allows
you
to
specify
your
own
prefixes
and
use
whatever
vocabulary
you
desire:
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" prefix="blog: http://example.com/blog-vocab#"> <head> <title property="blog:title">My Blog</title> </head> <body>...</body> </html>
A
previous
RDFa
Basic
example
showed
that
item
you
can
specify
a
machine-readable
alternate
to
the
human-readable
text
on
the
page.
Using
RDFa
Advanced,
you
can
specify
a
machine-readable
datatype
for
the
value
using
@typeof
:
the
@datatype
attribute:
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" prefix="cal: http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/ical# xsd: http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" ><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head><title>Jo's Friends and Family Blog</title></head> <body><p ><p about="#bbq"> I'm holding<span property="cal:summary"><span property="ical:summary"> one last summer Barbecue </span>, on<span property="cal:dtstart" content="2015-09-16T16:00:00-05:00" datatype="xsd:dateTime"><span property="ical:dtstart" content="2015-09-16T16:00:00-05:00" datatype="xsd:dateTime"> September 16th at 4pm </span>. </p> </body> </html>
RDFa allows the document to contain metadata information about other documents and resources:
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" prefix="bibo: http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/ dc: http://purl.org/dc/terms/" ><html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" prefix="bibo: http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/"> <head> <title>Books by Marco Pierre White</title> </head> <body> I think White's book '<span about="urn:ISBN:0091808189" typeof="bibo:Book" property="dc:title"> Canteen Cuisine </span>' is well worth getting since although it's quite advanced stuff, he makes it pretty easy to follow. You might also like <span about="urn:ISBN:1596913614" typeof="bibo:Book" property="dc:description"> White's autobiography </span>. </body> </html>
When
dealing
with
small
amounts
of
markup,
or
markup
that
may
be
heavily
cut-and-pasted,
it
is
sometimes
easier
better
to
use
full
IRIs,
rather
than
CURIEs.
The
previous
example
can
also
be
written
as
follows:
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<head>
<title>Books by Marco Pierre White</title>
</head>
<body>
I think White's book
'<span
about="urn:ISBN:0091808189"
typeof="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/Book"
property="http://purl.org/dc/terms/title"
>Canteen Cuisine</span>'
is well worth getting since although it's quite advanced stuff, he
makes it pretty easy to follow. You might also like
<span
about="urn:ISBN:1596913614"
typeof="http://purl.org/ontology/bibo/Book"
property="http://purl.org/dc/terms/description"
>White's autobiography</span>.
</body>
</html>
A
simple
way
of
defining
a
portion
of
a
document
using
terms
from
a
specific
vocabulary
is
to
use
@vocab
to
define
a
default
vocabulary
IRI.
For
example,
to
use
FOAF
terms:
<div about="#me">
My name is <span >John Doe</span> and my blog is called
<a href="http://example.org/blog/">Understanding Semantics</a>.
</div>
The
example
above
will
produce
the
following
triples,
expressed
here
in
Turtle
syntax:
@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> .
<#me> "John Doe" ;
foaf:homepage
<http://example.org/blog/>
.
RDFa
also
permits
external
definition
of
collections
of
prefixes
.
The
following
(mythical)
example
RDFa
Profile
document,
with
an
IRI
of
http://www.example.org/vocab-rdf-dc.html
,
defines
some
standard
RDF
prefixes
as
well
as
the
FOAF
and
Dublin
Core
vocabulary
prefixes
in
RDFa.
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
prefix="rdfa: http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfa#">
<head>
...
</head>
<body>
<p>This is an example to defining the standard RDF and
Dublin Core prefixes
</p>
<p typeof="rdfa:PrefixMapping">
The "<span property="rdfa:prefix">rdf</span>" prefix can
be used for the IRI:
"<span property="rdfa:uri">http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#</span>".</p>
<p typeof="rdfa:PrefixMapping">
The "<span property="rdfa:prefix">rdfs</span>" prefix can
be used for the IRI:
"<span property="rdfa:uri">http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#</span>".</p>
<p typeof="rdfa:PrefixMapping">
The "<span property="rdfa:prefix">dc</span>" prefix can
be used for the IRI:
"<span property="rdfa:uri">http://purl.org/dc/terms/</span>".</p>
<p typeof="rdfa:PrefixMapping">
The "<span property="rdfa:prefix">foaf</span>" prefix can
be used for the IRI:
"<span property="rdfa:uri">http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/</span>".</p>
</body>
</html>
The same content in Turtle is:
@prefix rdfa: <rdfa: http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfa#> . @prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> . [] a rdfa:PrefixMapping ; rdfa:prefix "rdf" ; rdfa:uri "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" . [] a rdfa:PrefixMapping rdfa:prefix "rdfs" ; rdfa:uri "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#" . [] a rdfa:PrefixMapping ; rdfa:prefix "dc" ; rdfa:uri "http://purl.org/dc/terms/" . [] a rdfa:PrefixMapping ; rdfa:prefix "foaf" ; rdfa:uri "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/" .
Using @profile , the following RDFa snippet:
<p about="http://www.example.org/doc"
profile="http://www.example.org/vocab-rdf-dc.html">
<span property="dc:title">title of the document</span>
<span property="rdfs:comment">and this is a longer comment
on the same document</span>
</p>
would yield the following triples:
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> . @prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> . <http://www.example.org/doc> dc:title "title of the document" ; rdfs:comment "and this is a longer comment on the same document" .
It
is
also
possible
to
define
terms
.
Given
the
following
RDFa
Profile
document
at
http://www.example.org/vocab-foaf-terms.html
:
<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"
prefix="rdfa: http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfa#">
<head>
...
</head>
<body>
<p>
This is an example RDFa vocabulary that makes it easier to
use the foaf:name and foaf:homepage terms.
</p>
<p typeof="rdfa:TermMapping">
The "<span property="rdfa:term">name</span>" term can
be used for the IRI:
"<span property="rdfa:uri">http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name</span>".</p>
<p typeof="rdfa:TermMapping">
The "<span property="rdfa:term">homepage</span>" term can
be used for the IRI:
"<span property="rdfa:uri">http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage</span>".</p>
</body>
</html>
and the following HTML markup:
<div profile="http://www.example.org/vocab-foaf-terms.html" about="#me"> My name is <span property="name">John Doe</span> and my blog is called <a rel="homepage" href="http://example.org/blog/">Understanding Semantics</a>. </div>
the following triples will be generated:
@prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> . <#me> foaf:name "John Doe" ; foaf:homepage <http://example.org/blog/> .
This section is non-normative.
The previous section gave examples of typical markup in order to illustrate the structure of RDFa markup. RDFa is short for "RDF in Attributes". In order to author RDFa you do not need to understand RDF, although it would certainly help. However, if you are building a system that consumes the RDF output of a language that supports RDFa you will almost certainly need to understand RDF. This section introduces the basic concepts and terminology of RDF. For a more thorough explanation of RDF, please refer to the RDF Concepts document [ RDF-CONCEPTS ] and the RDF Syntax Document [ RDF-SYNTAX ].
The structured data that RDFa provides access to is a collection of statements . A statement is a basic unit of information that has been constructed in a specific format to make it easier to process. In turn, by breaking large sets of information down into a collection of statements, even very complex metadata can be processed using simple rules.
To illustrate, suppose we have the following set of facts:
Albert was born on March 14, 1879, in the German Empire. There is a picture of him at the web address, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Albert_Einstein_Head.jpg.
This would be quite difficult for a machine to interpret, and it is certainly not in a format that could be passed from one data application to another. However, if we convert the information to a set of statements it begins to be more manageable. The same information could therefore be represented by the following shorter 'statements':
Albert was born on March 14, 1879. Albert was born in the German Empire. Albert has a picture at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Albert_Einstein_Head.jpg.
To make this information machine-processable, RDF defines a structure for these statements. A statement is formally called a triple , meaning that it is made up of three components. The first is the subject of the triple, and is what we are making our statements about . In all of these examples the subject is 'Albert'.
The second part of a triple is the property of the subject that we want to define. In the examples here, the properties would be 'was born on', 'was born in', and 'has a picture at'. These are more usually called predicates in RDF.
The final part of a triple is called the object . In the examples here the three objects have the values 'March 14, 1879', 'the German Empire', and 'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Albert_Einstein_Head.jpg'.
RDFa has complete support for internationalized characters. This includes internationalized characters in the subject, property and object location.
Breaking complex information into manageable units helps us be specific about our data, but there is still some ambiguity. For example, which 'Albert' are we talking about? If another system has more facts about 'Albert', how could we know whether they are about the same person, and so add them to the list of things we know about that person? If we wanted to find people born in the German Empire, how could we know that the predicate 'was born in' has the same purpose as the predicate 'birthplace' that might exist in some other system? RDF solves this problem by replacing our vague terms with IRI references .
IRIs are most commonly used to identify web pages, but RDF makes use of them as a way to provide unique identifiers for concepts. For example, we could identify the subject of all of our statements (the first part of each triple) by using the DBPedia [ http://dbpedia.org ] IRI for Albert Einstein, instead of the ambiguous string 'Albert':
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> has the name Albert Einstein. <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> was born on March 14, 1879. <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> was born in the German Empire. <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> has a picture at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Albert_Einstein_Head.jpg.
IRI references are also used to uniquely identify the objects in metadata statements (the third part of each triple). The picture of Einstein is already an IRI, but we could also use an IRI to uniquely identify the country 'German Empire'. At the same time we'll indicate that the name and date of birth really are literals (and not IRIs), by putting quotes around them:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> has the name "Albert Einstein". <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> was born on "March 14, 1879". <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> was born in <http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire>. <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> has a picture at < http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Albert_Einstein_Head.jpg > .
IRI references are also used to ensure that predicates are unambiguous; now we can be sure that 'birthplace', 'place of birth', 'Lieu de naissance' and so on, all mean the same thing:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name> "Albert Einstein". <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> <http://dbpedia.org/property/dateOfBirth> "March 14, 1879". <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> <http://dbpedia.org/property/birthPlace> <http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire>. <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/depiction> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Albert_Einstein_Head.jpg>.
Although IRI resources are always used for subjects and predicates, the object part of a triple can be either an IRI or a literal . In the example triples, Einstein's name is represented by a plain literal , which means that it is a basic string with no type or language information:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein>
<http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name>
"Albert
Einstein"
.
Some
literals,
such
as
dates
and
numbers,
have
very
specific
meanings,
so
RDF
provides
a
mechanism
for
indicating
the
type
of
a
literal.
A
typed
literal
is
indicated
by
attaching
an
IRI
to
the
end
of
a
plain
literal
,
and
this
IRI
indicates
the
literal's
datatype.
This
IRI
is
usually
based
on
datatypes
defined
in
the
XML
Schema
Datatypes
specification
[
XMLSCHEMA-2
].
The
following
syntax
would
be
used
to
unambiguously
express
Einstein's
date
of
birth
as
a
literal
of
type
http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#date
:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein>
<http://dbpedia.org/property/dateOfBirth>
"1879-03-14"
^^<http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#date>
.
RDF itself does not have one set way to express triples, since the key ideas of RDF are the triple and the use of IRIs, and not any particular syntax. However, there are a number of mechanisms for expressing triples, such as RDF/XML [ RDF-SYNTAX-GRAMMAR ], Turtle [ TURTLE ], and of course RDFa. Many discussions of RDF make use of the Turtle syntax to explain their ideas, since it is quite compact. The examples we have just seen are already using this syntax, and we'll continue to use it throughout this document when we need to talk about the RDF that could be generated from some RDFa. Turtle allows long IRIs to be abbreviated by using an IRI mapping, which can be used to express a compact IRI expression as follows:
@prefix dbp: <http://dbpedia.org/property/> . @prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> foaf:name "Albert Einstein" . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> dbp:birthPlace <http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire> .
Here 'dbp:' has been mapped to the IRI for DBPedia and 'foaf:' has been mapped to the IRI for the 'Friend of a Friend' taxonomy.
Any IRI in Turtle could be abbreviated in this way. This means that we could also have used the same technique to abbreviate the identifier for Einstein, as well as the datatype indicator:
@prefix dbp: <http://dbpedia.org/property/> . @prefix dbr: <http://dbpedia.org/resource/> . @prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> . @prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> . dbr:Albert_Einstein dbp:dateOfBirth "1879-03-14"^^xsd:date . dbr:Albert_Einstein foaf:depiction <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Albert_Einstein_Head.jpg> .
When writing examples, you will often see the following IRI in the Turtle representation:
<>
This indicates the 'current document', i.e., the document being processed. In reality there would always be a full IRI based on the document's location, but this abbreviation serves to make examples more compact. Note in particular that the whole technique of abbreviation is merely a way to make examples more compact, and the actual triples generated would always use the full IRIs.
A collection of triples is called a graph . All of the triples that are defined by this specification are contained in the default graph by an RDFa Processor. For more information on graphs and other RDF concepts, see [ RDF-CONCEPTS ].
In order to allow for the compact expression of RDF statements, RDFa allows the contraction of most IRI reference s into a form called a 'compact URI expression', or CURIE . A detailed discussion of this mechanism is in the section CURIE and IRI Processing .
Note that CURIEs are only used in the markup and Turtle examples, and will never appear in the generated triple s, which are defined by RDF to use IRI reference s.
Full details on how CURIEs are processed are in the section titled CURIE Processing .
A growing use of embedded metadata is to take fragments of markup and move them from one document to another. This may happen through the use of tools, such as drag-and-drop in a browser, or through snippets of code provided to authors for inclusion in their documents. (A good example of the latter is the licensing fragment provided by Creative Commons .)
However, those involved in creating fragments (either by building tools, or authoring snippets), should be aware that this specification does not say how fragments are processed. Specifically, the processing of a fragment 'outside' of a complete document is undefined because RDFa processing is largely about context. Future versions of this or related specifications may do more to define this behavior.
Developers of tools that process fragments, or authors of fragments for manual inclusion, should also bear in mind what will happen to their fragment once it is included in a complete document. They should carefully consider the amount of 'context' information that will be needed in order to ensure a correct interpretation of their fragment.
The following is a brief description of RDFa in terms of the RDF terminology introduced here. It may be useful to readers with an RDF background:
The aim of RDFa is to allow a single RDF graph to be carried in various types of document markup. An RDF graph comprises node s linked by relationships. The basic unit of an RDF graph is a triple , in which a subject node is linked to an object node via a predicate . The subject node is always either a IRI reference or a blank node (or bnode) , the predicate is always a IRI reference , and the object of a statement can be a IRI reference , a literal , or a bnode .
In RDFa, a subject IRI reference is generally indicated using @about or @src , and predicates are represented using one of @property , @rel , or @rev . Objects which are IRI reference s are represented using @resource , or @href , whilst objects that are literal s are represented either with @content or the content of the element in question (with an optional datatype expressed using @datatype , and an optional language expressed using a Host Language-defined mechanism such as xml:lang ).
As well as sections marked as non-normative, all authoring guidelines, diagrams, examples, and notes in this specification are non-normative. Everything else in this specification is normative.
The key words must , must not , required , should , should not , recommended , may , and optional in this specification are to be interpreted as described in [ RFC2119 ].
A conforming RDFa Processor must make available to a consuming application a single RDF graph containing all possible triples generated by using the rules in the Processing Model section. This specification uses the term default graph to mean all of the triples asserted by a document according to the Processing Model section. The term processor graph is used to denote the collection of all informational, warning, and error triples that may be generated by the RDFa Processor to report its status . The default graph and the processor graph are separate graphs and must not be stored in the same graph by the RDFa Processor.
A conforming RDFa Processor may make available additional triples that have been generated using rules not described here, but these triples must not be made available in the default graph . (Whether these additional triples are made available in one or more additional RDF graph s is implementation-specific, and therefore not defined here.)
A conforming RDFa Processor must preserve white space in both plain literal s and XML literals . However, it may be the case that the architecture in which a processor operates has made changes to the white space in a document before that document ever reaches the RDFa Processor (e.g., [ XMLSCHEMA-1 ] processors are permitted to 'normalize' white space in attribute values - see section 3.1.4). To ensure maximum consistency between processing environments, authors should remove any unnecessary white space in their plain and XML Literal content.
A
conforming
RDFa
Processor
must
examine
the
media
type
of
a
document
it
is
processing
to
determine
the
document's
Host
Language.
If
the
RDFa
Processor
is
unable
to
determine
the
media
type,
or
does
not
support
the
media
type,
the
RDFa
Processor
must
process
the
document
as
if
it
were
media
type
application/xml
.
See
XML+RDFa
Document
Conformance
.
A conforming RDFa Processor may use additional mechanisms (e.g., the DOCTYPE, a file extension, the root element) to attempt to determine the Host Language if the media type is unavailable. These mechanisms are unspecified.
There are two levels of conformance for RDFa Processors; Basic and Advanced. Processors may implement just Basic processing, Advanced processing, or may provide the ability to do both and switch between the two using arguments to an API.Basic Processor Conformance only requires that the following attributes are processed by RDFa Processors when performing the steps in the Processing Model section: @about , @content , @href , @property , @rel , @src , @typeof , @vocab . When only this subset of processing is supported, it must be made clear that the RDFa Processor complies to only the "Basic" conformance level of this specification.
Advanced Processor Conformance requires that all attributes listed in the Processing Model section are processed. An Advanced RDFa processor may also provide support for Basic processing by allowing a calling application to set the processor into a Basic processing mode. Note that it is possible for Basic processors to generate different triples from Advanced processors when re-bindable prefixes and terms are used. It is important that document authors generating markup for both types of processors do not use re-bindable prefixes if they intend to target both Basic and Advanced RDFa processors.
Host Languages that incorporate RDFa must adhere to the following:
).
Maintainers of Host Languages are required to change the IRI of a default profile if items are removed from the default profile document. The IRI change is required to accommodate RDFa Processors that statically embed the terms defined in the profile. The working group expects default RDFa Profiles to change very rarely.
This
specification
does
not
define
a
stand-alone
document
type.
The
attributes
herein
are
intended
to
be
integrated
into
other
host
languages
(e.g.,
HTML+RDFa
or
XHTML+RDFa).
However,
this
specification
does
define
processing
rules
for
generic
XML
documents
-
that
is,
those
documents
delivered
as
media
types
text/xml
or
application/xml
.
Such
documents
must
meet
all
of
the
following
criteria:
When an RDFa Processor processes an XML+RDFa document, it does so in the following context:
http://www.w3.org/profile/rdfa-1.1
.
This
specification
defines
a
number
of
attributes
and
the
way
in
which
the
values
of
those
attributes
are
to
be
interpreted
when
generating
RDF
triples.
This
section
defines
the
attributes
and
the
syntax
of
their
values.
values,
first
for
RDFa
Basic,
and
then
for
RDFa
Advanced.
CDATA
string,
for
supplying
machine-readable
content
for
a
literal
(a
'plain
literal
object',
in
RDF
terminology);
NCName ':' ' '+ xs:anyURI
Many attributes accept a white space separated list of tokens. This specification defines white space as:
whitespace ::= (#x20 | #x9 | #xD | #xA)+
When attributes accept a white space separated list of tokens, an RDFa Processor must ignore any leading or trailing white space.
This definition is consistent with the definition found in [ XML10 ].
The key component of RDF is the IRI, but these are usually long and unwieldy. RDFa therefore supports a mechanism by which IRIs can be abbreviated, called 'compact URI expressions' or simply, CURIEs .
When expanded, the resulting IRI must be a syntactically valid IRI [ RFC3987 ]. For a more detailed explanation see CURIE and IRI Processing . The lexical space of a CURIE is as defined in curie below. The value space is the set of IRIs.
A
CURIE
is
comprised
of
two
components,
a
prefix
and
a
reference
.
The
prefix
is
separated
from
the
reference
by
a
colon
(
:
).
In
general
use
it
is
possible
to
omit
the
prefix,
and
so
create
a
CURIE
that
makes
use
of
the
'default
prefix'
mapping;
in
RDFa
the
'default
prefix'
mapping
is
http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#
.
It's
also
possible
to
omit
both
the
prefix
and
the
colon,
and
so
create
a
CURIE
that
contains
just
a
reference
which
makes
use
of
the
'no
prefix'
mapping.
This
specification
does
not
define
a
'no
prefix'
mapping.
RDFa
Host
Languages
must
not
define
a
'no
prefix'
mapping.
The RDFa 'default prefix' should not be confused with the 'default namespace' as defined in [ XML-NAMES ]. An RDFa Processor must not treat an XML-NAMES 'default namespace' declaration as if it were setting the 'default prefix'.
The general syntax of a CURIE can be summarized as follows:
prefix ::= NCName])reference ::= irelative-ref (as defined in [RFC3987]) curie ::= [ [ prefix ] ':' ] reference safe_curie ::= '[' [ [ prefix ] ':' ] reference ']'
The
production
safe_curie
is
not
required,
even
in
situations
where
an
attribute
value
is
permitted
to
be
a
CURIE
or
an
IRI:
An
IRI
that
uses
a
scheme
that
is
not
an
in-scope
mapping
cannot
be
confused
with
a
CURIE.
The
concept
of
a
safe_curie
is
retained
for
backward
compatibility.
In normal evaluation of CURIEs the following context information would need to be provided:
:p
);
p
);
_:p
).
In RDFa these values are defined as follows:
A CURIE is a representation of a full IRI. The rules for determining that IRI are:
prefix
and
a
reference
,
the
IRI
is
obtained
by
taking
the
current
default
prefix
mapping
and
concatenating
it
with
the
reference
.
If
there
is
no
current
default
prefix
mapping,
then
this
is
not
a
valid
CURIE
and
must
be
ignored.
prefix
and
reference
,
and
if
there
is
an
in-scope
mapping
for
prefix
(when
compared
case-insensitively),
then
the
IRI
is
created
by
using
that
mapping,
and
concatenating
it
with
the
reference
.
prefix
,
then
the
value
is
not
a
CURIE.
See General Use of Terms in Attributes for the way items with no colon can be interpreted in some datatypes by RDFa Processors.
This section is non-normative.
In many cases, language designers have attempted to use QNames for an extension mechanism [ XMLSCHEMA-2 ]. QNames do permit independent management of the name collection, and can map the names to a resource. Unfortunately, QNames are unsuitable in most cases because 1) the use of QName as identifiers in attribute values and element content is problematic as discussed in [ QNAMES ] and 2) the syntax of QNames is overly restrictive and does not allow all possible IRIs to be expressed.
A
specific
example
of
the
problem
this
causes
comes
from
attempting
to
define
the
name
collection
for
books.
In
a
QName,
the
part
after
the
colon
must
be
a
valid
element
name,
making
an
example
such
as
the
following
invalid
:
isbn:0321154991
This is not a valid QName simply because "0321154991" is not a valid element name. Yet, in the example given, we don't really want to define a valid element name anyway. The whole reason for using a QName was to reference an item in a private scope - that of ISBNs. Moreover, in this example, we want the names within that scope to map to an IRI that will reveal the meaning of that ISBN. As you can see, the definition of QNames and this (relatively common) use case are in conflict with one another.
This specification addresses the problem by defining CURIEs. Syntactically, CURIEs are a superset of QNames.
Note that this specification is targeted at language designers, not document authors. Any language designer considering the use of QNames as a way to represent IRIs or unique tokens should consider instead using CURIEs:
This section looks at a generic set of processing rules for creating a set of triples that represent the structured data present in an RDFa document. Processing need not follow the DOM traversal technique outlined here, although the effect of following some other manner of processing must be the same as if the processing outlined here were followed. The processing model is explained using the idea of DOM traversal which makes it easier to describe (particularly in relation to the evaluation context ).
Evaluating a document for RDFa triples is carried out by starting at the document object, and then visiting each of its child elements in turn, in document order, applying processing rules. Processing is recursive in that for each child element the processor also visits each of its child elements, and applies the same processing rules.
In some environments there will be little difference between starting at the root element of the document, and starting at the document object itself. It is defined this way because in some environments important information is present at the document object level which is not present on the root element.
As processing continues, rules are applied which may generate triples, and may also change the evaluation context information that will then be used when processing descendant elements.
This specification does not say anything about what should happen to the triples generated, or whether more triples might be generated during processing than are outlined here. However, to be conforming, an RDFa Processor must act as if at a minimum the rules in this section are applied, and a single RDF graph produced. As described in the RDFa Processor Conformance section, any additional triples generated must not appear in the default graph .
During processing, each rule is applied using information provided by an evaluation context . An initial context is created when processing begins. That context has the following members:
base
element.
The
important
thing
is
that
it
establishes
an
IRI
against
which
relative
paths
can
be
resolved.
During the course of processing, new evaluation context s are created which are passed to each child element. The rules described below will determine the values of the items in the context. Additionally, some rules will cause new triples to be created by combining information provided by an element with information from the evaluation context .
During the course of processing a number of locally scoped values are needed, as follows:
Statement chaining is an RDFa feature that allows the author to link RDF statements together while avoiding unnecessary repetitive markup. For example, if an author were to add statements as children of an object that was a resource, these statements should be interpreted as being about that resource:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein"> <span property="foaf:name">Albert Einstein</span> <span property="dbp:dateOfBirth" datatype="xsd:date">1879-03-14</span> <div rel="dbp:birthPlace" resource="http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire"> <span property="dbp:conventionalLongName">the German Empire</span> </div> </div>
In this example we can see that an object resource ('German_Empire'), has become the subject for nested statements. This markup also illustrates the basic chaining pattern of 'A has a B has a C' (i.e., Einstein has a birth place of the German Empire, which has a long name of "the German Empire").
It's also possible for the subject of nested statements to provide the object for containing statements — essentially the reverse of the example we have just seen. To illustrate, we'll take an example of the type of chaining just described, and show how it could be marked up more efficiently. To start, we mark up the fact that Albert Einstein had, at some point in his life, a residence both in the German Empire and in Switzerland:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein"> <div rel="dbp-owl:residence" resource="http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire"></div> <div rel="dbp-owl:residence" resource="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Switzerland"></div> </div>
Now, we show the same information, but this time we create an incomplete triple from the residence part, and then use any number of further subjects to 'complete' that triple, as follows:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein" rel="dbp-owl:residence"> <span about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire"></span> <span about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Switzerland"></span> </div>
In this example, the incomplete triple actually gets completed twice, once for the German Empire and once for Switzerland, giving exactly the same information as we had in the earlier example:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> dbp-owl:residence <http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire> . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> dbp-owl:residence <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Switzerland> .
Chaining
can
sometimes
involve
elements
containing
relatively
minimal
markup,
for
example
showing
only
one
resource,
or
only
one
predicate.
Here
the
img
element
is
used
to
carry
a
picture
of
Einstein:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein">
<div rel="foaf:depiction">
<img src="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Albert_Einstein_Head.jpg" />
</div>
</div>
When such minimal markup is used, any of the resource-related attributes could act as a subject or an object in the chaining:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein"> <div rel="dbp-owl:residence"> <span about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire"></span> <span about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Switzerland"></span> </div> </div>
Since RDFa is ultimately a means for transporting RDF, a key concept is the resource and its manifestation as a IRI. RDF deals with complete IRIs (not relative paths); when converting RDFa to triples, any relative IRIs must be resolved relative to the base IRI, using the algorithm defined in section 6.5 of RFC 3987 [ RFC3987 ], Reference Resolution . The values of RDFa attributes that refer to IRIs use three different datatypes: URI , SafeCURIEorCURIEorIRI , or TERMorCURIEorAbsIRI . All these attributes are mapped, after processing, to IRIs. The handling of these attributes is as follows:
Note that it is possible for all values in an attribute to be ignored. When that happens, the attribute must be treated as if it were empty.
For example, the full IRI for Albert Einstein on DBPedia is:
http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein
This can be shortened by authors to make the information easier to manage, using a CURIE. The first step is for the author to create a prefix mapping that links a prefix to some leading segment of the IRI. In RDFa these mappings are expressed using the XML namespace syntax:
<div prefix="db: http://dbpedia.org/">
...
</div>
Once the prefix has been established, an author can then use it to shorten an IRI as follows:
<div prefix="db: http://dbpedia.org/">
<div about="db:resource/Albert_Einstein">
...
</div>
</div>
The author is free to split the IRI at any point, as long as it begins at the left end. However, since a common use of CURIEs is to make available libraries of terms and values, the prefix will usually be mapped to some common segment that provides the most re-use, often provided by those who manage the library of terms. For example, since DBPedia contains an enormous list of resources, it is more efficient to create a prefix mapping that uses the base location of the resources:
<div prefix="dbr: http://dbpedia.org/resource/"> <div about="dbr:Albert_Einstein"> ... </div> <div about="dbr:Baruch_Spinoza"> ... </div> </div>
CURIE prefix mappings are defined on the current element and its descendants. The inner-most mapping for a given prefix takes precedence. For example, the IRIs expressed by the following two CURIEs are different, despite the common prefix, because the prefix mappings are locally scoped:
<div prefix="dbr: http://dbpedia.org/resource/"> <div about="dbr:Albert_Einstein"> ... </div> </div> <div prefix="dbr: http://someotherdb.org/resource/"> <div about="dbr:Albert_Einstein"> ... </div> </div>
There are a number of ways that attributes make use of CURIEs, and they need to be dealt with differently. These are:
An
empty
attribute
value
(e.g.,
typeof=''
)
is
still
a
CURIE,
and
is
processed
as
such.
The
rules
for
this
processing
are
defined
in
Sequence
.
Specifically,
however,
an
empty
attribute
value
is
never
treated
as
a
relative
IRI
by
this
specification.
An example of an attribute that can contain a CURIEorIRI is @about . To express an IRI directly, an author might do this:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein">
...
</div>
whilst to express the IRI above as a CURIE they would do this:
<div about="dbr:Albert_Einstein">
...
</div>
The author could also use a safe CURIE, as follows:
<div about="[dbr:Albert_Einstein]">
...
</div>
Since non-CURIE values must be ignored, the following value in @about would not set a new subject, since @about does not permit the use of TERM s, and the CURIE has no prefix separator.
<div about="[Albert_Einstein]">
...
</div>
However, this markup would set a subject, since it is not a CURIE, but a valid relative IRI:
<div about="Albert_Einstein">
...
</div>
Note that several RDFa attributes are able to also take TERMS as their value. This is discussed in the next section.
Some RDFa attributes have a datatype that permits a term to be referenced. RDFa defines the syntax of a term as:
term ::= NCName
When an RDFa attribute permits the use of a term, and the value being evaluated matches the production for term above, it is transformed to an IRI using the following logic:
term
matches
an
item
in
the
list
of
local
term
mappings
.
First
compare
against
the
list
case-sensitively
,
and
if
there
is
no
match
then
compare
case-insensitively
.
If
there
is
a
match,
use
the
associated
IRI.
term
.
term
has
no
associated
IRI
and
must
be
ignored.
In
the
event
that
multiple
term
s
are
defined
that
differ
only
in
case
(e.g.,
'Agent',
'agent',
and
'AGENT'),
if
a
reference
is
made
which
DOES
NOT
match
case-sensitively
(e.g.,
typeof='AGENt'),
the
results
are
UNSPECIFIED.
The general rules discussed in the previous sections apply to the RDFa attributes in the following ways:
Any value that matches a defined term must be expanded into a reference to the corresponding IRI. For example in [ XHTML-RDFA ] the following examples:
<link rel="next" href="http://example.org/page2.html" /> <link rel=" xhv:next " href="http://example.org/page2.html" />
would each generate the following triple:
<> <http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/vocab#next> <http://example.org/page2.html> .
In RDFa, it is possible to establish relationships using various types of resource references, including bnode s. If a subject or object is defined using a CURIE, and that CURIE explicitly names a bnode , then a Conforming Processor must create the bnode when it is encountered during parsing. The RDFa Processor must also ensure that no bnode created automatically (as a result of chaining ) has a name that collides with a bnode that is defined by explicit reference in a CURIE.
Consider the following example:
<link about="_:john" rel="foaf:mbox" href="mailto:john@example.org" /> <link about="_:sue" rel="foaf:mbox" href="mailto:sue@example.org" /> <link about="_:john" rel="foaf:knows" resource="_:sue" />
In the above fragment, two bnodes are explicitly created as the subject of triples. Those bnodes are then referenced to demonstrate the relationship between the parties. After processing, the following triples will be generated:
_:john foaf:mbox <mailto:john@example.org> . _:sue foaf:mbox <mailto:sue@example.org> . _:john foaf:knows _:sue .
RDFa Processors use, internally, implementation-dependent identifiers for bnodes. When triples are retrieved , new bnode indentifiers are used, which usually bear no relation to the original identifiers. However, implementations do ensure that these generated bnode identifiers are consistent: each bnode will have its own identifier, all references to a particular bnode will use the same identifier, and different bnodes will have different identifiers.
As
a
special
case,
_:
is
also
a
valid
reference
for
one
specific
bnode
.
Processing
would
normally
begin
after
the
document
to
be
parsed
has
been
completely
loaded.
However,
there
is
no
requirement
for
this
to
be
the
case,
and
it
is
certainly
possible
to
use
a
stream-based
approach,
such
as
SAX
[
SAX
]
to
extract
the
RDFa
information.
However,
if
some
approach
other
than
the
DOM
traversal
technique
defined
here
is
used,
it
is
important
to
ensure
that
Host
Language-specific
processing
rules
are
applied
(e.g.,
XHTML+RDFa
[
XHTML-RDFA
]
indicates
the
base
element
can
be
used,
and
base
will
affect
the
interpretation
of
IRIs
in
meta
or
link
elements
even
if
those
elements
are
before
the
base
element
in
the
stream).
At the beginning of processing, an initial evaluation context is created, as follows:
base
element);
Processing begins by applying the processing rules below to the document object, in the context of this initial evaluation context . All elements in the tree are also processed according to the rules described below, depth-first, although the evaluation context used for each set of rules will be based on previous rules that may have been applied.
This
specification
defines
processing
rules
for
optional
attributes
that
may
not
be
present
in
all
Host
Languages
(e.g.,
@xmlns:
).
If
these
attributes
are
not
supported
in
the
Host
Language,
then
the
corresponding
processing
rules
are
not
relevant
for
that
language.
The processing rules are:
If no IRI is provided by a resource attribute, then the first match from the following rules will apply:
If no IRI is provided then the first match from the following rules will apply:
Then the current object resource is set to the IRI obtained from the first match from the following rules:
Note that final value of the current object resource will either be null (from initialization) or a full IRI.
XMLLiteral
in
the
vocabulary
http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
.
The actual literal is either the value of @content (if present) or a string created by concatenating the value of all descendant text nodes, of the current element in turn. The final string includes the datatype IRI, as described in [ RDF-CONCEPTS ], which will have been obtained according to the section on CURIE and IRI Processing .
XMLLiteral
in
the
vocabulary
http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
.
The
value
of
the
XML
literal
is
a
string
created
by
serializing
to
text,
all
nodes
that
are
descendants
of
the
current
element
,
i.e.,
not
including
the
element
itself,
and
giving
it
a
datatype
of
XMLLiteral
in
the
vocabulary
http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
.
The
format
of
the
resulting
serialized
content
is
as
defined
in
Exclusive
XML
Canonicalization
Version
[
XML-EXC-C14N
].
In order to maintain maximum portability of this literal, any children of the current node that are elements must have the current XML namespace declarations (if any) declared on the serialized element. Since the child element node could also declare new XML namespaces, the RDFa Processor must be careful to merge these together when generating the serialized element definition. For avoidance of doubt, any re-declarations on the child node must take precedence over declarations that were active on the current node.
Additionally, if there is a value for current language then the value of the plain literal should include this language information, as described in [ RDF-CONCEPTS ]. The actual literal is either the value of @content (if present) or a string created by concatenating the text content of each of the descendant elements of the current element in document order.
The current object literal is then used with each predicate to generate a triple as follows:
The processing rules covered in the previous section are designed to extract as many triples as possible from a document. The RDFa Processor is designed to continue processing, even in the event of errors. For example, failing to resolve a prefix mapping or term would result in the RDFa Processor skipping the generation of a triple and continuing with document processing. There are cases where knowing each RDFa Processor warning or error would be beneficial to authors. The processor graph is designed as a possible mechanism to capture all informational, warning, and error messages as triples from the RDFa Processor. These status triples may be retrieved and used to aid RDFa authoring or automated error detection.
If an RDFa Processor supports the generation of a processor graph, then it must generate a set of triples when the following processing issues occur:
Other implementation-specific rdfa:Info, rdfa:Warning, or rdfa:Error triples may be generated by the RDFa Processor.
Accessing the processor graph may be accomplished in a variety of ways and is dependent on the type of RDFa Processor and access method that the developer is utilizing.
SAX-based processors or processors that utilize function or method callbacks to report the generation of triples are classified as event-based RDFa Processor s. For Event-based RDFa Processors, the software must allow the developer to register a function or callback that is called when a triple is generated for the processor graph . The callback may be the same as the one that is used for the default graph as long as it can be determined if a generated triple belongs in the processor graph or the default graph .
A whole-graph RDFa Processor is defined as any RDFa Processor that processes the entire document and only allows developer access to the triples after processing has completed. RDFa Processors that typically fall into this category express their output via a single call using RDF/XML, N3, TURTLE, or N-Triples notation. For whole-graph RDFa Processors, the software must allow the developer to specify if they would like to retrieve the default graph , the processor graph , or both graphs as a single, combined graph from the RDFa Processor. If the graph preference is not specified, the default graph must be returned.
An
web
service
RDFa
Processor
is
defined
as
any
RDFa
Processor
that
is
capable
of
processing
a
document
by
performing
an
HTTP
GET,
POST
or
similar
action
on
an
RDFa
Processor
IRI.
For
this
class
of
RDFa
Processor,
the
software
must
allow
the
caller
to
specify
if
they
would
like
to
retrieve
the
default
graph
,
the
processor
graph
,
or
both
graphs
as
a
single,
combined
graph
from
the
web
service.
The
rdfagraph
query
parameter
must
be
used
to
specify
the
value.
The
allowable
values
are
default
,
processor
or
both
values,
in
any
order,
separated
by
a
comma
character.
If
the
graph
preference
is
not
specified,
the
default
graph
must
be
returned.
To ensure interoperability, a core hierarchy of classes is defined for the content of the processor graph. Separate errors or warnings are resources (typically blank nodes) of a specific type, with additional properties giving more details on the error condition or the warning. This specification defines only the top level classes and the ones referring to the error and warning conditions defined explicitly by this document. Other, implementation-specific subclasses may be defined by the RDFa Processor.
The
top
level
classes
are
rdfa:Error
,
rdfa:Warning
,
and
rdfa:Info
,
defined
as
part
of
the
RDFa
Vocabulary
.
Furthermore,
a
single
property
is
defined
on
those
classes,
namely
rdfa:context
,
that
provides
an
extra
context
for
the
error,
e.g.,
http
response,
an
XPath
information,
or
simply
the
IRI
to
the
RDFa
resource.
Usage
of
this
property
is
optional,
and
more
than
one
triple
can
be
used
with
this
predicate
on
the
same
subject.
Finally,
error
and
warning
instances
should
use
the
dc:description
and
dc:date
properties.
dc:description
should
provide
a
short,
human
readable
but
implementation
dependent
description
of
the
error.
dc:date
should
give
the
time
when
the
error
was
found
and
it
is
advised
to
be
as
precise
as
possible
to
allow
the
detection
of,
for
example,
possible
network
errors.
The
example
below
shows
the
triples
that
should
be
minimally
present
in
the
processor
graph
as
a
result
of
an
error
(the
content
of
the
literal
for
the
dc:description
predicate
is
implementation
dependent):
@prefix rdfa: <http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfa#> . @prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> . @prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> . [] a rdfa:ProfileReferenceError ; dc:description "The @profile value could not be deferenced" ; dc:date "2010-06-30T13:40:23"^^xsd:dateTime .
A
slightly
more
elaborate
example
makes
use
of
the
rdfa:context
property
to
provide
further
information,
using
external
vocabularies
to
represent
HTTP
headers
or
XPointer
information:
@prefix rdfa: <http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfa#> .
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
@prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
@prefix ptr: <http://www.w3.org/2009/pointers#> .
@prefix http: <http://www.w3.org/2006/http#> .
[] a rdfa:ProfileReferenceError ;
dc:description "The @profile value could not be deferenced" ;
dc:date "2010-06-30T13:40:23"^^xsd:dateTime ;
rdfa:context <http://www.example.org/profile> ;
rdfa:context [
a ptr:Pointer ;
# detailed xpointer/xpath information provided here to locate the
# DOM node with the @profile attribute
] ;
rdfa:context [
a http:Response ;
http:responseCode <http://www.w3.org/2006/http#404>
# Get the HTTP response headers on the request for the profile file.
].
This section is non-normative.
This section provides an in-depth examination of the processing steps described in the previous section. It also includes examples which may help clarify some of the steps involved.
The key to processing is that a triple is generated whenever a predicate/object combination is detected. The actual triple generated will include a subject that may have been set previously, so this is tracked in the current evaluation context and is called the parent subject . Since the subject will default to the current document if it hasn't been set explicitly, then a predicate/object combination is always enough to generate one or more triples.
The attributes for setting a predicate are @rel , @rev and @property , whilst the attributes for setting an object are @resource , @href , @content , and @src . @typeof is unique in that it sets both a predicate and an object at the same time (and also a subject when it appears in the absence of other attributes that would set a subject). Inline content might also set an object, if @content is not present, but @property is present.
There are many examples in this section. The examples are all written using XHTML+RDFa. However, the explanations are relevant regardless of the Host Language.
When triples are created they will always be in relation to a subject resource which is provided either by new subject (if there are rules on the current element that have set a subject) or parent subject , as passed in via the evaluation context . This section looks at the specific ways in which these values are set. Note that it doesn't matter how the subject is set, so in this section we use the idea of the current subject which may be either new subject or parent subject .
When
parsing
begins,
the
current
subject
will
be
the
IRI
of
the
document
being
parsed,
or
a
value
as
set
by
a
Host
Language-provided
mechanism
(e.g.,
the
base
element
in
(X)HTML).
This
means
that
by
default
any
metadata
found
in
the
document
will
concern
the
document
itself:
<html profile="http://www.example.org/vocab-rdf-dc.html">
<head>
<title>Jo's Friends and Family Blog</title>
<link rel="foaf:primaryTopic" href="#bbq" />
<meta property="dc:creator" content="Jo" />
</head>
<body>
...
</body>
</html>
This would generate the following triples:
<> foaf:primaryTopic <#bbq> . <> dc:creator "Jo" .
It is possible for the data to appear elsewhere in the document:
<html profile="http://www.example.org/vocab-rdf-dc.html">
<head>
<title>Jo's Blog</title>
</head>
<body>
<h1><span property="dc:creator">Jo</span>'s blog</h1>
<p>
Welcome to my blog.
</p>
</body>
</html>
which would still generate the triple:
<> dc:creator "Jo" .
In
(X)HTML
the
value
of
base
may
change
the
initial
value
of
current
subject
:
<html profile="http://www.example.org/vocab-rdf-dc.html">
<head>
<base href="http://www.example.org/jo/blog" />
<title>Jo's Friends and Family Blog</title>
<link rel="foaf:primaryTopic" href="#bbq" />
<meta property="dc:creator" content="Jo" />
</head>
<body>
...
</body>
</html>
An RDFa Processor should now generate the following triples, regardless of the IRI from which the document is served:
<http://www.example.org/jo/blog> foaf:primaryTopic <#bbq> . <http://www.example.org/jo/blog> dc:creator "Jo" .
As
processing
progresses,
any
@about
attributes
will
change
the
current
subject
.
The
value
of
@about
is
an
IRI
or
a
CURIE.
If
it
is
a
relative
IRI
then
it
needs
to
be
resolved
against
the
current
base
value.
To
illustrate
how
this
affects
the
statements,
note
in
this
markup
how
the
properties
inside
the
(X)HTML
body
element
become
part
of
a
new
calendar
event
object,
rather
than
referring
to
the
document
as
they
do
in
the
head
of
the
document:
<html profile="http://www.example.org/vocab-rdf-dc.html"prefix="cal: http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/ical#">prefix="ical: http://www.w3.org/2002/12/cal/ical#"> <head> <title>Jo's Friends and Family Blog</title> <link rel="foaf:primaryTopic" href="#bbq" /> <meta property="dc:creator" content="Jo" /> </head> <body><p ><p about="#bbq" typeof="ical:Vevent"> I'm holding<span ><span property="ical:summary"> one last summer barbecue </span>, on<span content="2015-09-16T16:00:00-05:00"<span property="ical:dtstart" content="2015-09-16T16:00:00-05:00" datatype="xsd:dateTime"> September 16th at 4pm </span>. </p> </body> </html>
With this markup an RDFa Processor will generate the following triples:
<> foaf:primaryTopic <#bbq> . <> dc:creator "Jo" . <#bbq> rdf:type cal:Vevent . <#bbq> cal:summary "one last summer barbecue" . <#bbq> cal:dtstart "2015-09-16T16:00:00-05:00"^^xsd:dateTime .
Other kinds of resources can be used to set the current subject , not just references to web-pages. Although not advised, email addresses might be used to represent a person:
John knows <a about="mailto:john@example.org" rel="foaf:knows" href="mailto:sue@example.org">Sue</a>. Sue knows <a about="mailto:sue@example.org" rel="foaf:knows" href="mailto:jim@example.org">Jim</a>.
This should generate the following triples:
<mailto:john@example.org> foaf:knows <mailto:sue@example.org> . <mailto:sue@example.org> foaf:knows <mailto:jim@example.org> .
Similarly, authors may make statements about images:
<div about="photo1.jpg">
this photo was taken by
<span property="dc:creator">Mark Birbeck</span>
</div>
which should generate the following triples:
<photo1.jpg> dc:creator "Mark Birbeck" .
If @about is not present, then @src is next in priority order, for setting the subject of a statement. A typical use would be to indicate the licensing type of an image:
<img src="photo1.jpg" rel="license"
resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/"
/>
Since there is no difference between @src and @about , then the information expressed in the last example in the section on @about (the creator of an image), could be expressed as follows:
<img src="photo1.jpg"
rel="license" resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/"
property="dc:creator" content="Mark Birbeck"
/>
Since normal chaining rules will apply, the image IRI can also be used to complete hanging triples:
<div about="http://www.blogger.com/profile/1109404" rel="foaf:img">
<img src="photo1.jpg"
rel="license" resource="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/"
property="dc:creator" content="Mark Birbeck"
/>
</div>
The complete markup yields three triples:
<http://www.blogger.com/profile/1109404> foaf:img <photo1.jpg> . <photo1.jpg> xhv:license <http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0/> . <photo1.jpg> dc:creator "Mark Birbeck" .
Whilst
@about
explicitly
creates
a
new
context
for
statements,
@typeof
does
so
implicitly.
@typeof
works
differently
to
other
ways
of
setting
a
predicate
since
the
predicate
is
always
rdf:type
,
which
means
that
the
processor
only
requires
one
attribute,
the
value
of
the
type.
Since @typeof is setting the type of an item, this means that if no item exists one should automatically be created. This involves generating a new bnode , and is examined in more detail below; it is mentioned here because the bnode used by the new item will become the subject for further statements.
For example, an author may wish to create markup for a person using the FOAF vocabulary, but without having a clear identifier for the item:
<div typeof="foaf:Person">
<span property="foaf:name">Albert Einstein</span>
<span property="foaf:givenName">Albert</span>
</div>
This
markup
would
cause
a
bnode
to
be
created
which
has
a
'type'
of
foaf:Person
,
as
well
as
name
and
given
name
properties:
_:a rdf:type foaf:Person . _:a foaf:name "Albert Einstein" . _:a foaf:givenName "Albert" .
_:a
as
being
distinct
from
_:b
.
But
by
not
exposing
these
values
to
any
external
software,
it
is
possible
to
have
complete
control
over
the
identifier,
as
well
as
preventing
further
statements
being
made
about
the
item.
As described in the previous two sections, @about will always take precedence and mark a new subject, but if no @about value is available then @typeof will do the same job, although using an implied identifier, i.e., a bnode .
But if neither @about or @typeof are present, there are a number of ways that the subject could be arrived at. One of these is to 'inherit' the subject from the containing statement, with the value to be inherited set either explicitly, or implicitly.
The most usual way that an inherited subject might get set would be when the parent statement has an object that is a resource. Returning to the earlier example, in which the long name for the German_Empire was added, the following markup was used:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein">
<span property="foaf:name">Albert Einstein</span>
<span property="dbp:dateOfBirth" datatype="xsd:date">1879-03-14</span>
<div rel="dbp:birthPlace" resource="http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire" />
<span about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire"
property="dbp:conventionalLongName">the German Empire</span>
</div>
In an earlier illustration the subject and object for the German Empire were connected by removing the @resource , relying on the @about to set the object:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein">
<span property="foaf:name">Albert Einstein</span>
<span property="dbp:dateOfBirth" datatype="xsd:date">1879-03-14</span>
<div rel="dbp:birthPlace">
<span about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire"
property="dbp:conventionalLongName">the German Empire</span>
</div>
</div>
but it is also possible for authors to achieve the same effect by removing the @about and leaving the @resource :
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein">
<span property="foaf:name">Albert Einstein</span>
<span property="dbp:dateOfBirth" datatype="xsd:date">1879-03-14</span>
<div rel="dbp:birthPlace" resource="http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire">
<span property="dbp:conventionalLongName">the German Empire</span>
</div>
</div>
In this situation, all statements that are 'contained' by the object resource representing the German Empire (the value in @resource ) will have the same subject, making it easy for authors to add additional statements:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein">
<span property="foaf:name">Albert Einstein</span>
<span property="dbp:dateOfBirth" datatype="xsd:date">1879-03-14</span>
<div rel="dbp:birthPlace" resource="http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire">
<span property="dbp:conventionalLongName">the German Empire</span>
<span rel="dbp-owl:capital" resource="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Berlin" />
</div>
</div>
Looking at the triples that an RDFa Processor would generate, we can see that we actually have two groups of statements; the first group are set to refer to the @about that contains them:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> foaf:name "Albert Einstein" . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> dbp:dateOfBirth "1879-03-14"^^xsd:date . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> dbp:birthPlace <http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire> .
whilst the second group refer to the @resource that contains them:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire> dbp:conventionalLongName "the German Empire" . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire> dbp-owl:capital <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Berlin> .
Note also that the same principle described here applies to @src and @href .
There will be occasions when the author wants to connect the subject and object as shown above, but is not concerned to name the resource that is common to the two statements (i.e., the object of the first statement, which is the subject of the second). For example, to indicate that Einstein was influenced by Spinoza the following markup could well be used:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Baruch_Spinoza" rel="dbp-owl:influenced">
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein">
<span property="foaf:name">Albert Einstein</span>
<span property="dbp:dateOfBirth" datatype="xsd:date">1879-03-14</span>
</div>
</div>
An RDFa Processor will generate the following triples:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Baruch_Spinoza> dbp-owl:influenced <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> foaf:name "Albert Einstein" . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> dbp:dateOfBirth "1879-03-14"^^xsd:date .
However, an author could just as easily say that Spinoza influenced something by the name of Albert Einstein, that was born on March 14th, 1879 :
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Baruch_Spinoza" rel="dbp-owl:influenced"> <div> <span property="foaf:name">Albert Einstein</span> <span property="dbp:dateOfBirth" datatype="xsd:date">1879-03-14</span> </div> </div>
In RDF terms, the item that 'represents' Einstein is anonymous , since it has no IRI to identify it. However, the item is given an automatically generated bnode , and it is onto this identifier that all child statements are attached:
An RDFa Processor will generate the following triples:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Baruch_Spinoza> dbp-owl:influenced _:a . _:a foaf:name "Albert Einstein" . _:a dbp:dateOfBirth "1879-03-14"^^xsd:date .
Note
that
the
div
is
superfluous,
and
an
RDFa
Processor
will
create
the
intermediate
object
even
if
the
element
is
removed:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Baruch_Spinoza" rel="dbp-owl:influenced"> <span property="foaf:name">Albert Einstein</span> <span property="dbp:dateOfBirth" datatype="xsd:date">1879-03-14</span> </div>
An
alternative
pattern
is
to
keep
the
div
and
move
the
@rel
onto
it:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Baruch_Spinoza">
<div rel="dbp-owl:influenced">
<span property="foaf:name">Albert Einstein</span>
<span property="dbp:dateOfBirth" datatype="xsd:date">1879-03-14</span>
</div>
</div>
From the point of view of the markup, this latter layout is to be preferred, since it draws attention to the 'hanging rel'. But from the point of view of an RDFa Processor, all of these permutations need to be supported.
When a new subject is calculated, it is also used to complete any incomplete triples that are pending. This situation arises when the author wants to 'chain' a number of statements together. For example, an author could have a statement that Albert Einstein was born in the German Empire:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein">
<span property="foaf:name">Albert Einstein</span>
<span property="dbp:dateOfBirth" datatype="xsd:date">1879-03-14</span>
<div rel="dbp:birthPlace" resource="http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire" />
</div>
and then a further statement that the 'long name' for this country is the German Empire :
<span about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire" property="dbp:conventionalLongName">the German Empire</span>
RDFa allows authors to insert this statement as a self-contained unit into other contexts:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein">
<span property="foaf:name">Albert Einstein</span>
<span property="dbp:dateOfBirth" datatype="xsd:date">1879-03-14</span>
<div rel="dbp:birthPlace" resource="http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire" />
<span about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire"
property="dbp:conventionalLongName">the German Empire</span>
</div>
But it also allows authors to avoid unnecessary repetition and to 'normalize' out duplicate identifiers, in this case the one for the German Empire:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein">
<span property="foaf:name">Albert Einstein</span>
<span property="dbp:dateOfBirth" datatype="xsd:date">1879-03-14</span>
<div rel="dbp:birthPlace">
<span about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire"
property="dbp:conventionalLongName">the German Empire</span>
</div>
</div>
When this happens the @rel for 'birth place' is regarded as a 'hanging rel' because it has not yet generated any triples, but these 'incomplete triples' are completed by the @about that appears on the next line. The first step is therefore to store the two parts of the triple that the RDFa Processor does have, but without an object:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein>
dbp:birthPlace
?
.
Then as processing continues, the RDFa Processor encounters the subject of the statement about the long name for the German Empire, and this is used in two ways. First it is used to complete the 'incomplete triple':
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein>
dbp:birthPlace
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire>
.
and second it is used to generate its own triple:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire> dbp:conventionalLongName "the German Empire" .
Note that each occurrence of @about will complete any incomplete triples. For example, to mark up the fact that Albert Einstein had a residence both in the German Empire and Switzerland, an author need only specify one @rel value that is then used with multiple @about values:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein" rel="dbp-owl:residence"> <span about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire" /> <span about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Switzerland" /> </div>
In this example there is one incomplete triple:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein>
dbp-owl:residence
?
.
When the processor meets each of the @about values, this triple is completed, giving:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> dbp-owl:residence <http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire> . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein> dbp-owl:residence <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Switzerland> .
These examples show how @about completes triples, but there are other situations that can have the same effect. For example, when @typeof creates a new bnode (as described above), that will be used to complete any 'incomplete triples'. To illustrate, to indicate that Spinoza influenced both Einstein and Schopenhauer, the following markup could be used:
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Baruch_Spinoza">
<div rel="dbp-owl:influenced">
<div typeof="foaf:Person">
<span property="foaf:name">Albert Einstein</span>
<span property="dbp:dateOfBirth" datatype="xsd:date">1879-03-14</span>
</div>
<div typeof="foaf:Person">
<span property="foaf:name">Arthur Schopenhauer</span>
<span property="dbp:dateOfBirth" datatype="xsd:date">1788-02-22</span>
</div>
</div>
</div>
First the following incomplete triple is stored:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Baruch_Spinoza>
dbp-owl:influenced
?
.
Then when the RDFa Processor processes the two occurrences of @typeof , each generates a bnode , which is used to both complete the 'incomplete triple', and to set the subject for further statements:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Baruch_Spinoza"> dbp-owl:influenced _:a . _:a rdf:type foaf:Person . _:a foaf:name "Albert Einstein" . _:a dbp:dateOfBirth "1879-03-14"^^xsd:date . <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Baruch_Spinoza"> dbp-owl:influenced _:b . _:b rdf:type foaf:Person . _:b foaf:name "Arthur Schopenhauer" . _:b dbp:dateOfBirth "1788-02-22"^^xsd:date .
Triples are also 'completed' if any one of @property , @rel or @rev are present. However, unlike the situation when @about or @typeof are present, all predicates are attached to one bnode :
<div about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Baruch_Spinoza" rel="dbp-owl:influenced">
<span property="foaf:name">Albert Einstein</span>
<span property="dbp:dateOfBirth" datatype="xsd:date">1879-03-14</span>
<div rel="dbp-owl:residence">
<span about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire" />
<span about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Switzerland" />
</div>
</div>
This example has two 'hanging rels', and so two situations when 'incomplete triples' will be created. Processing would proceed as follows; first an incomplete triple is stored:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Baruch_Spinoza>
dbp-owl:influenced
?
.
Next,
the
RDFa
Processor
processes
the
predicate
values
for
foaf:name
,
dbp:dateOfBirth
and
dbp-owl:residence
,
but
note
that
only
the
first
needs
to
'complete'
the
'hanging
rel'.
So
processing
foaf:name
generates
two
triples:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Baruch_Spinoza> dbp-owl:influenced _:a . _:a foaf:name "Albert Einstein" .
but
processing
dbp:dateOfBirth
generates
only
one:
_:a
dbp:dateOfBirth
"1879-03-14"^^xsd:date
.
Processing
dbp-owl:residence
also
uses
the
same
bnode
,
but
note
that
it
also
generates
its
own
'incomplete
triple':
_:a
dbp-owl:residence
?
.
As before, the two occurrences of @about complete the 'incomplete triple', once each:
_:a dbp-owl:residence <http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire> . _:a dbp-owl:residence <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Switzerland> .
The entire set of triples that an RDFa Processor should generate are as follows:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Baruch_Spinoza> dbp-owl:influenced _:a . _:a foaf:name "Albert Einstein" . _:a dbp:dateOfBirth "1879-03-14"^^xsd:date . _:a dbp-owl:residence <http://dbpedia.org/resource/German_Empire> . _:a dbp-owl:residence <http://dbpedia.org/resource/Switzerland> .
Although objects have been discussed in the previous sections, as part of the explanation of subject resolution, chaining, evaluation contexts, and so on, this section will look at objects in more detail.
There are two types of object, IRI resource s and literal s.
A literal object can be set by using @property to express a predicate , and then using either @content , or the inline text of the element that @property is on. Note that the use of @content prohibits the inclusion of rich markup in your literal. If the inline content of an element accurately represents the object, then documents should rely upon that rather than duplicating that data using the @content .
A IRI resource object can be set using one of @rel or @rev to express a predicate , and then either using one of @href , @resource or @src to provide an object resource explicitly, or using the chaining techniques described above to obtain an object from a nested subject, or from a bnode .
An object literal will be generated when @property is present. @property provides the predicate, and the following sections describe how the actual literal to be generated is determined.
Literal object resolution
@content can be used to indicate a plain literal , as follows:
<meta about="http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/"
property="dc:creator"
content="Mark
Birbeck"
/>
The plain literal can also be specified by using the content of the element:
<span about="http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/"
property="dc:creator">
Mark
Birbeck
</span>
Both of these examples give the following triple:
<http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/> dc:creator "Mark Birbeck" .
The value of @content is given precedence over any element content, so the following would give exactly the same triple as shown above:
<span about="http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/"
property="dc:creator"
content="Mark
Birbeck"
>John
Doe</span>
Literals can be given a data type using @datatype .
This can be represented in RDFa as follows:
<span property="cal:dtstart" content="2015-09-16T16:00:00-05:00"<span property="ical:dtstart" content="2015-09-16T16:00:00-05:00" datatype="xsd:dateTime"> September 16th at 4pm </span>.
The triples that this markup generates include the datatype after the literal:
<>
cal:dtstart
"2015-09-16T16:00:00-05:00"^^
xsd:dateTime
.
XML documents cannot contain XML markup in their attributes, which means it is not possible to represent XML within @content (the following would cause an XML parser to generate an error):
<head>
<meta property="dc:title"
content="E = mc<sup>2</sup>: The Most Urgent Problem of Our Time" />
</head>
RDFa therefore supports the use of normal markup to express XML literals, by using @datatype :
<h2 property="dc:title" datatype="rdf:XMLLiteral">
E = mc<sup>2</sup>: The Most Urgent Problem of Our Time
</h2>
This would generate the following triple, with the XML preserved in the literal:
<> dc:title "E = mc<sup>2</sup>: The Most Urgent Problem of Our Time"^^rdf:XMLLiteral .
This
requires
that
an
IRI
mapping
for
the
prefix
rdf
has
been
defined.
In
the
examples
given
here
the
sup
element
is
actually
part
of
the
meaning
of
the
literal,
but
there
will
be
situations
where
the
extra
markup
means
nothing,
and
can
therefore
be
ignored.
In
this
situation
omitting
the
@datatype
attribute
or
specifying
an
empty
@datatype
value
can
be
used
create
a
plain
literal:
<p>You searched for <strong>Einstein</strong>:</p>
<p about="http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein">
<span property="foaf:name" datatype="">Albert <strong>Einstein</strong></span>
(b. March 14, 1879, d. April 18, 1955) was a German-born theoretical physicist.
</p>
Although the rendering of this page has highlighted the term the user searched for, setting @datatype to nothing ensures that the data is interpreted as a plain literal, giving the following triples:
<http://dbpedia.org/resource/Albert_Einstein>
foaf:name
"Albert
Einstein"
.
The value of this XML Literal is the exclusive canonicalization [ XML-EXC-C14N ] of the RDFa element's value.
Most of the rules governing the processing of objects that are resources are to be found in the processing descriptions given above, since they are important for establishing the subject. This section aims to highlight general concepts, and anything that might have been missed.
One or more IRI object s are needed when @rel or @rev is present. Each attribute will cause triples to be generated when used with @href , @resource or @src , or with the subject value of any nested statement if none of these attributes are present.
@rel and @rev are essentially the inverse of each other; whilst @rel establishes a relationship between the current subject as subject, and the current object resource as the object, @rev does the exact opposite, and uses the current object resource as the subject, and the current subject as the object.
RDFa provides the @resource attribute as a way to set the object of statements. This is particularly useful when referring to resources that are not themselves navigable links:
<html profile='http://www.example.org/vocab-rdf-dc.html'>
<head>
<title>On Crime and Punishment</title>
<base href="http://www.example.com/candp.xhtml" />
</head>
<body>
<blockquote about="#q1" rel="dc:source" resource="urn:ISBN:0140449132" >
<p id="q1">
Rodion Romanovitch! My dear friend! If you go on in this way
you will go mad, I am positive! Drink, pray, if only a few drops!
</p>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>
The
blockquote
element
generates
the
following
triple:
<http://www.example.com/candp.xhtml#q1> <http://purl.org/dc/terms/source> <urn:ISBN:0140449132> .
If no @resource is present, then @href is next in priority order, for setting the object.
When a predicate has been expressed using @rel , the @href on the RDFa statement's element is used to identify the object with a IRI reference . Its type is an IRI:
<link about="mailto:john@example.org"
rel="foaf:knows"
href="mailto:sue@example.org"
/>
It's also possible to use both @rel and @rev at the same time on an element. This is particularly useful when two things stand in two different relationships with each other, for example when a picture is taken by Mark, but that picture also depicts him:
<img src="photo1.jpg" rel="dc:creator" rev="foaf:img"
href="http://www.blogger.com/profile/1109404"
/>
which then yields two triples:
<photo1.jpg> dc:creator <http://www.blogger.com/profile/1109404> . <http://www.blogger.com/profile/1109404> foaf:img <photo1.jpg> .
When a triple predicate has been expressed using @rel or @rev , but no @href , @src , or @resource exists on the same element, there is a 'hanging rel'. This causes the current subject and all possible predicates (with an indicator of whether they are 'forwards, i.e., @rel values, or not, i.e., @rev values), to be stored as 'incomplete triples' pending discovery of a subject that could be used to 'complete' those triples.
This process is described in more detail in Completing 'Incomplete Triples' .
RDFa Profiles are collections of terms, prefix mappings, and/or default vocabulary declarations. A profile is either intrinsically known to the parser, or it is loaded as an external document and processed. These documents must be defined in an approved RDFa Host Language (currently XML+RDFa and XHTML+RDFa [ XHTML-RDFA ]). They may also be defined in other formats (e.g., RDF/XML [ RDF-SYNTAX-GRAMMAR ], or Turtle [ TURTLE ]). RDFa Profiles are referenced via @profile , and can be used by document authors to simplify the task of adding semantic markup. When an RDFa document includes @profile , its value is processed from beginning to end, with each separate IRI evaluated as follows:
When a profile is not retrievable, an RDFa Processor will not generate triples from the element the profile is referenced from, nor from any of its children. Consequently, any further processing of the triples would be effectively ignored.
rdfa:prefix
and
rdfa:uri
,
create
a
key-value
mapping
from
the
rdfa:prefix
object
literal
(the
key)
to
the
rdfa:uri
object
literal
(the
value).
Add
or
update
this
mapping
in
the
local
list
of
IRI
mappings
after
transforming
the
'prefix'
component
to
lower-case.
rdfa:term
and
rdfa:uri
,
create
a
key-value
mapping
from
the
rdfa:term
object
literal
(the
key)
to
the
rdfa:uri
object
literal
(the
value).
Add
or
update
this
mapping
in
the
local
term
mappings
.
rdfa:vocabulary
,
update
the
default
vocabulary
to
be
the
object
literal
of
the
rdfa:vocabulary
predicate.
When an RDFa Profile is defined using an RDF serialization, it must use the vocabulary terms above to declare the components of the profile.
Once all the IRIs in the @profile value have been processed, continue with the normal processing of the current element .
Profiles referenced on the same element are processed from beginning to end of the value of @profile . If any conflict arises between two RDFa Profiles associated with IRIs in the @profile value, the declaration from the RDFa Profile associated with the right-most IRI takes precedence.
It is possible that a referenced RDFa document will in turn reference other documents via @profile . Regardless of the depth to which such references might go, only the triples in the top level document effect current processing.
Caching of the relevant triples retrieved via this mechanism is recommended . Embedding definitions for well known, stable RDFa Profiles in the implementation is recommended .
The
object
literal
for
the
rdfa:uri
predicate
must
be
an
absolute
IRI.
The
object
literal
for
the
rdfa:term
predicate
must
match
the
production
for
term
.
The
object
literal
for
the
rdfa:prefix
predicate
must
match
the
production
for
prefix
.
The
object
literal
for
the
rdfa:vocabulary
predicate
must
be
an
absolute
IRI.
If
one
of
the
objects
is
not
a
Literal,
does
not
match
its
associated
production,
if
there
is
more
than
one
rdfa:vocabulary
predicate,
or
if
there
are
additional
rdfa:uri
or
rdfa:term
predicates
sharing
the
same
subject,
an
RDFa
Processor
must
not
update
the
associated
mapping.
Web authors utilizing RDFa Profiles should be aware that if a profile that they list is not available for any reason, and the RDFa Processor has not previously cached the profile, that all triples that should be generated as a result of the profile will not be generated. In addition, any other triples that exist in a subtree of the DOM will not be generated either since processing halts for a subtree in the DOM when a profile cannot be fetched.
Web authors utilizing both RDFa Profiles and a JavaScript-based RDFa processor should be aware that same-origin security protections are enforced for RDFa processors, just like any other JavaScript code. This means that if a profile is not served up using [ CORS ] or a similar technology that the processor may fail to retrieve the profile and thus the expected triples in the subtree of the DOM where the @profile is specified will not be generated.
In
order
to
facilitate
the
use
of
CURIEs
in
markup
languages,
this
specification
defines
some
additional
datatypes
in
the
XHTML
datatype
space
(
http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/datatypes/
).
Markup
languages
that
want
to
import
these
definitions
can
find
them
in
the
"datatypes"
file
for
their
schema
grammar:
Specifically, the following datatypes are defined:
This section is non-normative.
The following informative XML Schema definition for these datatypes is included as an example:
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<xs:schema
xmlns:xs="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema"
xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/datatypes/"
xmlns:xh11d="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/datatypes/"
targetNamespace="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml/datatypes/"
elementFormDefault="qualified"
>
<xs:simpleType name="CURIE">
<xs:restriction base="xs:string">
<xs:pattern value="(([\i-[:]][\c-[:]]*)?:)?.+" />
<xs:minLength value="1"/>
</xs:restriction>
</xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name="CURIEs">
<xs:list itemType="xh11d:CURIE"/>
</xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name="SafeCURIE">
<xs:restriction base="xs:string">
<xs:pattern value="\[(([\i-[:]][\c-[:]]*)?:)?.+\]" />
<xs:minLength value="3"/>
</xs:restriction>
</xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name="SafeCURIEs">
<xs:list itemType="xh11d:SafeCURIE"/>
</xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name="TERM">
<xs:list itemType="xs:NCName"/>
</xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name="CURIEorIRI">
<xs:union memberTypes="xh11d:CURIE xs:anyURI" />
</xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name="CURIEorIRIs">
<xs:list itemType="xh11d:CURIEorIRI"/>
</xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name="SafeCURIEorCURIEorIRI">
<xs:union memberTypes="xh11d:SafeCURIE xh11d:CURIE xs:anyURI" />
</xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name="SafeCURIEorCURIEorIRIs">
<xs:list itemType="xh11d:SafeCURIEorCURIEorIRI"/>
</xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name='AbsIRI'>
<xs:restriction base='xs:string'>
<xs:pattern value="[\i-[:]][\c-[:]]+:.+" />
</xs:restriction>
</xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name="TERMorCURIEorAbsIRI">
<xs:union memberTypes="xh11d:TERM xh11d:CURIE xh11d:AbsIRI" />
</xs:simpleType>
<xs:simpleType name="TERMorCURIEorAbsIRIs">
<xs:list itemType="xh11d:SafeCURIEorCURIEorAbsIRI"/>
</xs:simpleType>
</xs:schema>
This section is non-normative.
The following informative XML DTD definition for these datatypes is included as an example:
<!ENTITY % CURIE.datatype "CDATA" > <!ENTITY % CURIEs.datatype "CDATA" > <!ENTITY % CURIEorIRI.datatype "CDATA" > <!ENTITY % CURIEorIRIs.datatype "CDATA" > <!ENTITY % SafeCURIEorCURIEorIRI.datatype "CDATA" > <!ENTITY % SafeCURIEorCURIEorIRIs.datatype "CDATA" > <!ENTITY % TERMorCURIEorAbsIRI.datatype "CDATA" > <!ENTITY % TERMorCURIEorAbsIRIs.datatype "CDATA" >
The
RDFa
Vocabulary
has
two
roles:
it
contains
the
predicates
to
define
the
terms
and
prefixes
in
profile
documents,
and
it
contains
the
classes
and
predicates
for
the
messages
that
a
processor
graph
may
contain.
The
IRI
of
the
vocabulary
is
http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfa#
;
the
usual
prefix
used
in
this
document
is
rdfa
.
This vocabulary specification is available in XHTML+RDFa 1.1 , Turtle , and in RDF/XML formats.
The RDFa Vocabulary includes the following triples (shown here in Turtle [ TURTLE ] format):
@prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix rdfa: <http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfa#> .
<http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfa#> a owl:Ontology .
rdfa:PrefixOrTermMapping a rdfs:Class, owl:Class ;
dc:description "is the top level class for prefix or term mappings" .
rdfa:PrefixMapping dc:description "is the class for prefix mappings" .
rdfs:subClassOf rdfa:PrefixOrTermMapping .
rdfa:TermMapping dc:description "is the class for term mappings" .
rdfs:subClassOf rdfa:PrefixOrTermMapping .
rdfa:prefix a rdf:Property, owl:DatatypeProperty ;
rdfs:domain rdfa:PrefixMapping ;
dc:description "defines a prefix mapping for an IRI; the value is supposed to be a NMTOKEN" .
rdfa:term a rdf:Property, owl:DatatypeProperty ;
rdfs:domain rdfa:TermMapping ;
dc:description "defines a term mapping for an IRI; the value is supposed to be a NMTOKEN" .
rdfa:uri a rdf:Property, owl:DatatypeProperty ;
rdfs:domain rdfa:PrefixOrTermMapping ;
dc:description "defines the IRI for either a prefix or a term mapping;
the value is supposed to be an absolute IRI" .
rdfa:vocabulary a rdf:Property, owl:DatatypeProperty ;
dc:description "defines an IRI to be used as a default vocabulary;
the value is can be any string; for documentation purposes it is advised to use
the
string
‘true’
or
‘True’."
.
These predicates can be used to 'pair' IRI strings and their usage in the form of a prefix and/or a term as part of, for example, a blank node. An example can be as follows:
[] rdfa:uri "http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name" ; rdfa:prefix "foaf" .
which defines a prefix for the foaf IRI.
The Vocabulary includes the following term definitions (shown here in Turtle [ TURTLE ] format):
@prefix dc: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/> .
@prefix owl: <http://www.w3.org/2002/07/owl#> .
@prefix rdf: <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#> .
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#> .
@prefix rdfa: <http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfa#> .
rdfa:PGClass a rdfs:Class, owl:Class;
dc:description "is the top level class of the hierarchy" .
rdfa:Error dc:description "is the class for all error conditions";
rdfs:subClassOf rdfa:PGClass .
rdfa:Warning dc:description "is the class for all warnings";
rdfs:subClassOf rdfa:PGClass .
rdfa:Info dc:description "is the class for all informations";
rdfs:subClassOf rdfa:PGClass .
rdfa:DocumentError dc:description "error condition; to be used when the document
fails to be fully processed as a result of non-conformant host language markup";
rdfs:subClassOf rdfa:Error .
rdfa:ProfileReferenceError dc:description "error condition; to be used
when an RDFa Profile document fails to be retrieved and thus, a portion of the
document fails to be processed";
rdfs:subClassOf rdfa:Error .
rdfa:UnresolvedTerm dc:description "warning; to be used when a Term fails to be resolved";
rdfs:subClassOf rdfa:Warning .
rdfa:UnresolvedCURIE dc:description "warning; to be used when a CURIE prefix
fails to be resolved";
rdfs:subClassOf rdfa:Warning .
rdfa:context a owl:ObjectProperty, rdf:Property;
dc:description "provides extra context for the error, e.g., http response,
an XPointer/XPath information, or simply the IRI that created the error";
rdfs:domain
rdfa:PGClass
.
This section is non-normative.
This specification introduces a number of new features, and extends the behavior of some features from the previous version. The following summary may be helpful to RDFa Processor developers, but is not meant to be comprehensive.
While this specification strives to be as backward compatible as possible with [ RDFA-SYNTAX ], the changes above mean that there are some circumstances where it is possible for different RDF triples to be output for the same document when processed by an RDFa 1.0 processor vs. an RDFa 1.1 processor. In order to minimize these differences, a document author can do the following:
XHTML+RDFa
1.0
on
the
html
element.
datatype='rdf:XMLLiteral'
.
datatype=''
.
When producing XHTML+RDFa 1.1 documents, it is possible to reduce the incompatibilities with RDFa 1.0 conforming processors by doing the following:
XHTML+RDFa
1.0
on
the
html
element.
datatype='rdf:XMLLiteral'
.
datatype=''
.
2010-07-26: Added the 'vocabulary' term to the RDFa Profile handling.
2010-02-25: Split into RDFa Core and XHTML+RDFa.
2010-01-01: Applied changes to start production of version 1.1. This includes the re-integration of datatype CURIEorIRI.
This section is non-normative.
At the time of publication, the active members of the RDFa Working Group were: