Re: lcsh.info RDFa SKOS and content negotiation - use of RDF-style # IDs in RDFa?

Williams, Stuart (HP Labs, Bristol) wrote:
> Hello Dan,
> 
> Granted that this is not a content-negotiation case, but I think that sectiion 3.2.2 of Webarch [1] may be relevant here, particularly the 3rd situation described therein.

This is a conneg case; there is RDF/XML and RDFa coming from the same URI.

> The XHTML+RDFa representation returned here does not *define* a target for the #concept fragment identifier - were the an id="concept" on the div there would be an inconsistency. The representation conveys assertions *about*  http://lcsh.info/sh85112589#concept, wisely IMO avoiding the about="#concept" form which would take us into same document reference territory.
> 
> Certainly there's a little squinting going on here - but I think that unless one is actually making assertions about 'fragments' of the document, then its ok as long as the references *do not* resolve to a hypertext anchor in the document [aside: I'd also avoid naming things with names that look like xpointer expressions too :-)].

I think you've found the best way of wriggling through this mess of 
specs :) It doesn't feel entirely graceful but it should at least allow 
us to deploy RDF/XML and RDFa alongside each other in this style.

> I think that the relevant media-type registrations could (and probably should) be brought into line.

That would be nice. Is it feasible?

I was wondering whether we might also sneak in a common symbol 
'#123412341234' (or something else obscure) meaning "the main thing 
described by this document", so that this common case could proceed 
without risk of unintended clashes (except by those who use that 
hard-to-guess symbol).

cheers,

Dan


> Stuart
> --
> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/webarch/#frag-coneg
> 
> Hewlett-Packard Limited registered Office: Cain Road, Bracknell, Berks RG12 1HN
> Registered No: 690597 England

Received on Friday, 3 October 2008 12:50:21 UTC