RE: Issue-base-param: do we need the parameter?

On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, McBride, Brian wrote:

> Not sure I understood that.  A template outputing:
>
>  <rdf:Description rdf:about="">
>    <rdfs:label>foo</rdfs:label>
>  </rdf:Description>
>  <rdf:Description rdf:about=".">
>    <rdfs:label>foo</rdfs:label>
>  </rdf:Description>
>
> Creates a graph with two triples because the "" and the "." identify two
> different resources.  Right?

Well, from my reading of rfc2396 (below), the '.' has a special meaning of 
'current path' - which would resolve to the baseURI (same as an empty 
relative reference).

[[[
  The syntax for relative URI is a shortened form 
of that for absolute
    URI, where some prefix of the URI is missing and certain path
    components ("." and "..") have a special meaning when, and only when,
    interpreting a relative path.  The relative URI syntax is defined in
    Section 5.
]]]

> I take that as indicating your are leaning (acuteness of angle as yet
> undetermined) towards not having a parameter specifying the base uri.
>

Yes =)

Chimezie Ogbuji
Lead Systems Analyst
Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery
Cleveland Clinic Foundation
9500 Euclid Avenue/ W26
Cleveland, Ohio 44195
Office: (216)444-8593
ogbujic@ccf.org