Re: Exact wording for non-prefixed CURIEs in @rel/@rev

Mark Birbeck wrote:
> How about that? We simply modify the introductory part of the CURIE
> section to say that unprefixed CURIEs are ignored (which we have
> already, but it's not published) and then in some other suitable spot
> we just say that "license" => "xh:license", "next" => "xh:next", and
> so on.

I like this, it maps nicely to how most parsers will be written without
making a big stink about pre-processing like I was doing :)

> And we might as well change the empty prefix from XHTML-vocab (since
> no-one needs to write ":next" anymore) to the current default mapping.

Sounds good to me, too.

-Ben