Re: Is about="[talk:]" a valid CURIE?

Manu Sporny wrote:
> 
> I believe that Mark's and Shane's intention for CURIEs was to make it a
> simple string replacement algorithm (guys, please correct me if I'm
> wrong)... which would mean that you have a valid point. However, the
> RDFa REC currently states that a CURIE is this:
> 
> curie :=   [ [ prefix ] ':' ] reference
> 
> Which, I believe, means that this:
> 
> about="[talk:]"
> 
> is invalid, even if talk is specified as a valid prefix earlier in the
> document.
>

Yes, that is what bothered me, too, and make me think that what I do,
though may be very useful in practice, may not be the correct behaviour
in view of the spec. Having said that: the spec does not say what to do
if a CURIE is invalid in this sense, or at least I have not found it.

> When implementing librdfa, I tried to follow the specification quite
> literally. I think the correct behavior is to interpret about="[talk:]"
> as about="". Thoughts?

And that was my intention, too:-) But I must admit I did not pay
attention to the fact that reference might be required...

I guess we need two things:

- Mark and/or Shane should tell us what the intention and the goal was
with a missing reference
- whatever we decide, we should extend the test cases with a new entry
- Manu or Ivan have to change their respective software:-)

Ivan

> 
> -- manu
> 

-- 

Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf