This HTML5 document contains 4 embedded RDF statements represented using HTML+Microdata notation.

The embedded RDF content will be recognized by any processor of HTML5 Microdata.

Namespace Prefixes

PrefixIRI
crmscihttp://www.ics.forth.gr/isl/CRMsci/
n2http://data.silknow.org/object/4b051557-23ea-394a-b81b-a9faa2609a97/observation/
ecrmhttp://erlangen-crm.org/current/
rdfhttp://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
n6http://data.silknow.org/object/
xsdhhttp://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#
n5http://data.silknow.org/observation/

Statements

Subject Item
n2:3
rdf:type
crmsci:S4_Observation
ecrm:P3_has_note
As skirts became wider and shorter during the 1830s attention focussed on the foot and ankle. Brightly coloured silk shoes complemented the richness of the gown, often matching the sash or the long fluttering ribbons worn in the hat. They came in a wide variety of colours, including the ‘canary yellow’, ‘palm-leaf green’ and ‘marshmallow blossom’. Delicate bows and rosettes enhanced the daintiness of the shoe and foot. Due to their fragility, silk ‘slippers’ were usually reserved for indoor wear, evening dress or special occasions. Looking at these examples it is not difficult to see why. Although the toes are lined with linen and the back of the upper with kid, they were clearly not made to last. Some writers complained that silk shoes became distorted and ugly after a few days wear. They were also probably uncomfortable as the toes are narrow, square and very shallow.
ecrm:P2_has_type
n5:general-observation
crmsci:O8_observed
n6:4b051557-23ea-394a-b81b-a9faa2609a97