- From: Steven Pemberton <steven.pemberton@cwi.nl>
- Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 14:07:05 +0200
- To: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
FYI ------- Forwarded message ------- From: "Henry S. Thompson" <ht@inf.ed.ac.uk> To: www-tag@w3.org Cc: Subject: Towards a TAG consideration of CURIEs Date: Fri, 30 Mar 2007 13:06:04 +0200 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 I took an action at the last TAG telcon (minutes forthcoming) to try to draft a statement of where the current CURIE draft [1] (actually quotes below are from a Member-only editors' draft [1a], which contains some minor changes to the syntax) raises architectural issues. *Executive Summary* Do the expected benefits of CURIEs outweigh the potential costs in introducing a _third_ syntax for identifiers into the languages of the Web? *Background* XML Namespaces introduced the notion of expanded names, that is, names in the form of a pair of namespace name (possibly empty) and local name. It further introduced an abbreviation mechanism, involving prefixes and namespace declarations. The word 'QName' has come to be used for both the syntactic form such abbreviations take (i.e. (NCName ':')? NCName ) and the two-part name such abbreviations stand for. As such, QNames are clearly distinct from URIs. Their use as identifiers, however, immediately raises the question of their relationship with URIs. The TAG considered the use of QNames as shorthand for URIs in issue rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6 [2], and issued a finding on the the related subject of using QNames as names for things other than XML elements and attributes, called "Using Qualified Names (QNames) as Identifiers in XML Content" [3]. In that finding, we find "We observe also that there is an overlap in the lexical space of QNames and URIs. "Specifications that use QNames to represent {URI, local-name} pairs SHOULD NOT allow both forms in attribute values or element content where they would be indistinguishable." and also "Where there is a compelling reason to use QNames instead of URIs for identification, it is imperative that specifications provide a mapping between QNames and URIs, if such a mapping is possible." The Architecture of the World Wide Web summarises these points in its section on QNames [4]. *CURIEs* Unlike QNames, CURIEs are explicitly intended as abbreviations for URIs. None-the-less they use an extension of the syntax of QNames, namely NCName ':' [pretty unconstrained string] *Architectural issues* If the CURIE WD is eventually adopted, we will have three related forms of identification: 1) URIs themselves; 2) CURIEs as abbreviations of (absolute) URIs; 3) QNames as abbreviations for expanded names, which in _some_ circumstances are mapped by convention or explicit algorithm to URIs. In [3] and [4] the potential confusions of overlapping syntax and function arising from the use of QNames as identifiers and even as abbreviations for URIs is accepted as a fact with good historical and pragmatic motivations. The fundamental architectural question raised by the CURIE specification is then whether the expected benefits outweigh the potential costs in introducing a _third_ syntax for identifiers into the languages of the Web. A subsidiary question depends on exactly what the intended scope of application of this specification is -- if it is as widely-targetted as it appears to be, would it not be better to consider an addendum to the relevant RFCs, e.g. 3986 and 3987 [5] [6]? And finally, the question of how CURIE would integrate with the typing and typed-data manipulation facilities provided by W3C XML Schema and XPath 2.0/XSLT 2.0/XQuery also needs careful consideration. ht [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2007/WD-curie-20070307/ [1a] http://www.w3.org/MarkUp/Group/2007/ED-curie-20070322/ [2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/issues.html?type=1#rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6 [3] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/qnameids.html [4] http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#xml-qnames [5] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt [6] http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3987.txt - -- Henry S. Thompson, HCRC Language Technology Group, University of Edinburgh Half-time member of W3C Team 2 Buccleuch Place, Edinburgh EH8 9LW, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440 Fax: (44) 131 650-4587, e-mail: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/ [mail really from me _always_ has this .sig -- mail without it is forged spam] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFGDO8ckjnJixAXWBoRAguVAJ9bRp253y37UMuZwxyTQ07o+60NswCePQpe 1r3jL/PRXK5J7Gaz63u1diA= =c22I -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Friday, 30 March 2007 12:07:26 UTC