W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-lod@w3.org > January 2011

Re: URI Comparisons: RFC 2616 vs. RDF

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 09:22:59 +0000
Message-ID: <4D395073.2030805@webr3.org>
To: Harry Halpin <hhalpin@ibiblio.org>
CC: Alan Ruttenberg <alanruttenberg@gmail.com>, David Wood <david@3roundstones.com>, Dave Reynolds <dave.e.reynolds@gmail.com>, "public-lod@w3.org" <public-lod@w3.org>, Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Harry Halpin wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 11:15 AM, Nathan <nathan@webr3.org> wrote:
>> Out of interest, where is that process defined? I was looking for it the
>> other day - for instance in the quoted specification we have the example:
>> <edi:price xmlns:edi='http://ecommerce.example.org/schema'
>> units='Euro'>32.18</edi:price>
>> Where's the bit of the XML specification which says you join them up by
>> concatenating 'http://ecommerce.example.org/schema' with #(?assumed?) and
>> 'Euro' to get 'http://ecommerce.example.org/schema#Euro'?
> Actually you don't. A namespace is just that - a tuple (namespace,
> localname) in XML. That's why namespaces in XML are far all intents
> and purposes broken and why, to a large extent, Web browser developers
> in HTML stopped using them and hate implementing them in the DOM, and
> so refuse to have them in HTML5. And that's one reason RDF(A) will
> probably continue getting a sort of bad rap in the HTML world, as
> prefixes are not associated with just making URIs, but with this
> terrible namespace tuple.
> For an archeology of the relevant standards, check out Section "What
> Namespaces Do" of this paper. While the paper is focussed on why
> namespace documents are a mess, the relevant information is in that
> section and extensively referenced, with examples:
> http://xml.coverpages.org/HHalpinXMLVS-Extreme.html

Ahh, thanks for explaining that one Harry, most helpful :)


Received on Friday, 21 January 2011 09:24:11 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:16:11 UTC