Semantic annotation primer needs a FAQ for 'what is a "good" triple-subject?'

[mobb]

possibly restate the FAQ.
In the primer, there were notes about what made a proper triple subject that were removed to simplify the main body. They need to be summarized as an FAQ, and then linked back. Removed text is below.

[mobb]

Below are the chunks of text removed from the primer.

<a name="rdf-eml-example-3"></a>

From example 3

_Note: The subject described in the `rdf:Description` `about` element attribute ideally would be a globally unique HTTP URI for the (EML) attribute, rather than 'att.4'-- which is a localized identifier. Methods for constructing this HTTP URI are being developed by EDI, NCEAS, and others.  While care must be taken that the `id` provided in the original EML was unique or defined with proper scoping and referencing elements, in RDF this is not a problem: `id`s specified in "rdf:about" attributes can be repeated without issue._


Text


<a name="rdf-eml-example-4"></a>

From example 4


_Note: The subject described in the `rdf:Description` `about=` element attribute should ideally be a globally unique URI issued for 'eric.seabloom'.  The URL for Eric's ORCID ID would be a good candidate for filling this role. Methods for constructing this HTTP URI are being developed by EDI, NCEAS, and others, for referencing datasets and their components (e.g. specific attributes), in their various sponsored data repositories.  Unlike EML, there are not restrictions on re-using "identifiers" in this way_

[mobb]

As part of this issue, revisit the appendix sections on RDF and graphs.