W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > January 2008

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

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 16:04:24 -0600
Message-ID: <47966868.80702@aptest.com>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
CC: RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>

One sort of peripheral point that not everyone may understand:

Manu Sporny wrote:
> I don't think we should have a "mapping" to use when there is no prefix.
> The two lines above should be removed from the document. Having a prefix
> mapping for non-prefixed CURIEs assumes that all non-prefixed CURIEs are
> valid and have a mapping (which is not true).
The CURIE spec requires that you define such a mapping since the syntax
allows it and many grammars that need CURIEs might want to make it
available.  However, it is perfectly legal to have a host language
define that the mapping is to nothing (there is no default prefix
mapping).  Its what the CURIE spec calls an additional constraint.  In
this case, however, what I would say is there are no non-prefixed nor
default prefixed CURIEs.  There are just prefixed CURIEs and some
reserved values that map into the XHTML vocab# space.

I think this is consistent with where Ben and Mark have landed, but we 
should just be aware that that what we are doing here with CURIEs is not 
what SPARQL will do with CURIEs, for example.  And that's fine.

Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Tuesday, 22 January 2008 22:04:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:50:26 UTC