5677RDFForms: comment on rf:form
- Mar 1, 2006Hi Mark,
this is a comment onthe section
"Form" and "method" of http://www.markbaker.ca/2003/05/RDF-Forms/
You present the RDF below as an alternative to the rf:Container
example appearing earlier in the text.
You mention the problem that rf:method suggests that the processor
implements the POST method.
I have two additional questions:
The RDF also asserts that the processor is of rdf:type rf:Form, which
also does not seem to be the intended semantic, yes?
What is the intention of the rf:Form in general? What does it tell
the client that cannot be accomplished with the existing
(rf:Container etc.) mechanism already?
You write (regarding rf:method):
"The intended interpretation is that the method be considered as a
descriptor of this instance of the form itself - which is why the use
of rdf:type in Container/Indexable/Settable was appropriate."
I have trouble understanding what this gets at, can you explain?
Jan Algermissen, Consultant & Programmer
Tugboat Consulting, 'Applying Web technology to enterprise IT'