W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > May 2011

Re: Namespace (was: Re: Preparing editor's drafts -- Q's for the team contacts)

From: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
Date: Thu, 26 May 2011 14:52:30 +0100
Cc: Dan Brickley <danbri@danbri.org>, RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <F5C893A4-84E0-4901-9F18-FA2BCD37A565@cyganiak.de>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
On 25 May 2011, at 12:28, Ivan Herman wrote:
> (alas!, it is not possible to define a new vocabulary URI for rdf and rdfs; it would be sooooo much better to use
> http://www.w3.org/ns/rdf
> http://www.w3.org/ns/rdfs
> :-(

Well, we can't do much, but there's something that we can do NOW. We can give the community license to experiment and find out whether the shorter namespaces are worth the pain induced by a change. When it's time for the next RDF in 2020, the verdict should be in.


W3C Working Group Note

To facilitate the migration to shorter namespace IRIs for RDF and RDFS, we reserve the namespace


for use in a future version of RDF. The suggested prefix is rdf2:. RDF implementations may consider supporting all terms in the current rdf: and rdfs: namespaces not just under their customary IRIs, but also under a corresponding IRI in the rdf2: namespace.

Note however that data published using this rdf2: namespaces is not valid RDF 1.1.

This is not a commitment that any future version of RDF will use the rdf2: namespace, or define in it any of the terms in the current rdf: and rdfs: namespaces, or define them with the same semantics.
Received on Thursday, 26 May 2011 13:53:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 22:01:59 UTC