[uf-new] collection-design-pattern proposal

Tue Apr 24 01:41:41 PDT 2007

> On Apr 22, 2007, at 10:12 PM, Manu Sporny wrote:
>> > I propose that we use this collection-design-pattern mentioned
> > above for
> > specifying all collections due to the following advances over all
> > of the
> > other proposed methods:

Nice idea, but I believe it's redundant. HTML already has collections,
ordered and unordered.
Generic:
<ul>
 <li>an item</li>
 <li>another item</li>
</ul>
Collection has a type:
<ul class="things">
 <li>an item</li>
 <li>another item</li>
</ul>
(which re-raises the question of whether class="xoxo" is desirable)
Individuals have types:
<ul>
 <li class="xthings">an item</li>
 <li class="ythings">another item</li>
</ul>
and the collection and/or individuals can have unique ids:
<ul id="the_collection">
 <li id="xthing">an item</li>
 <li id="ything">another item</li>
</ul>
Other relations can be expressed:
<ul>
 <li id="xthing"><a href="#ything" rel="neighbour">an item</a></li>
 <li id="ything">another item</li>
</ul>
(probably not perfect, but I think it could be made to work)
Specific definitions of the interpretation can be provided using a
metadata profile, e.g. by providing an RDF mapping via GRDDL.
What more is needed?
Cheers,
Danny.
-- 
http://dannyayers.com