Re: anachronistic RDF in SMIL 2.0 Metainformation Module

Mike,

The former SMIL 2.0 Metainformation Module
http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-SMIL2-20050107/
says

<rdf:RDF
       xmlns:rdf = "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
       xmlns:rdfs = "http://www.w3.org/TR/1999/PR-rdf-schema-19990303#"
       xmlns:dc = "http://purl.org/metadata/dublin_core#"
       xmlns:smilmetadata = "http://www.example.org/AudioVideo/.../smil-ns#" >

The latest SMIL 2.1 Metainformation Module (draft about to be published 
as PR)
http://www.w3.org/AudioVideo/Group/2004/spec/PR-smil21-2005-latest/metadata.html
says

<rdf:RDF
       xmlns:rdf = "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
       xmlns:rdfs = "http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
       xmlns:dc = "http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
       xmlns:smilmetadata = "http://www.example.org/AudioVideo/.../smil-ns#" >

This was a Namespace change request sent during SMIL 2.1 CR.
This should adress your namesapce request.

The about, ID, and resource attributes should be rdf:about, rdf:ID, and 
rdf:resource, per [4].
I will update the spec accordinglly.

Thierry.




Mike Dean a écrit :

>Thierry,
>
>A colleague recently directed me to [1].  I'm pleased to see the use of RDF,
>but noticed several anachronisms and inconsistencies with the current
>Semantic Web specs:
>
>The rdfs namespace should be http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#, per [2].
>
>The dc namespace should be http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/, as in [3].
>
>The about, ID, and resource attributes should be rdf:about, rdf:ID, and
>rdf:resource, per [4].
>
>Property names should preferably be lowerCamelCase rather than
>UpperCamelCase.
>
>It would be preferable if smilmetadata:Duration used xsd:duration PT60S
>rather than "60 secs".
>
>LevelAccessibilityGuidelines should presumably have a namespace prefix.
>
>Thanks!
>
>	Mike
>	http://www.daml.org/people/mdean/
>
>[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/REC-SMIL2-20050107/metadata.html
>
>[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-schema-20040210/
>
>[3] http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema
>
>[4] http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-syntax-grammar-20040210/
>
>
>  
>