W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > February 2011

Re: TERMorCURIEorAbsURIs definition problem

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Sun, 06 Feb 2011 16:28:33 +0000
Message-ID: <4D4ECC31.6040300@webr3.org>
To: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
CC: RDFA Working Group <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Agree, we could point to the ABNF for IRI and URI, something like:

A valid IRI is one which matches the following ABNF as per RFC 3987

  IRI = scheme ":" ihier-part [ "?" iquery ] [ "#" ifragment ]

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3987#section-2.2

A valid URI is one which matches the following ABNF as per RFC 3986

  URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ]

http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-3

Unsure of what text to use, but that's the definitions :)

Best,

Nathan


Shane McCarron wrote:
> I agree that this is an editorial error and agree with Nathan's 
> suggested reference fix.  However, I feel like we should explain 'valid 
> IRI' somewhere locally so it is clear a 'valid IRI' must be absolute.
> 
> On 2/5/2011 5:40 PM, Nathan wrote:
>> Hi Shane, all,
>>
>> Currently TERMorCURIEorAbsURI is used by:
>>   @datatype
>>   @property
>>   @rel
>>   @rev
>>   @typeof
>>
>> The text in CURIE and URI Processing [1] currently reads:
>>
>> TERMorCURIEorAbsURI
>>   If the value is an NCName, then it is evaluated as a term according 
>> to General Use of Terms in Attributes. Note that this step may mean 
>> that the value is to be ignored.
>>   If the value is a valid CURIE, then the resulting URI is used.
>>   If the value is an absolute URI, that value is used.
>>   Otherwise, the value is ignored.
>>
>> Now, "absolute URI" is defined as:
>>
>>   scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ]
>>   scheme ":" ihier-part [ "?" iquery ] // IRI
>>
>> So currently, by that text no URI with a fragment is allowed as the 
>> value of the five attributes aforementioned.
>>
>> I'm quite sure this is just editorial and due to the definitions in an 
>> old URI RFC (rfc2396), but for current URI and IRI specs we'll be 
>> needing "valid URI" or "valid IRI"
>>
>>   IRI   = scheme ":" ihier-part [ "?" iquery ] [ "#" ifragment ]
>>
>> which includes the fragment :)
>>
>> Suggest the text is changed from:
>>
>>   "If the value is an absolute URI, that value is used."
>>
>> To:
>>
>>   "If the value is a valid URI, that value is used."
>>
>> Which will clear this up.
>>
>> As an aside, might also be good if the first line read "If the value 
>> is a term, then it is evaluated as a term acco.." rather than NCName, 
>> we have term defined in the spec and it's definition is NCName any way.
>>
>> [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-core/#s_curieprocessing
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> Nathan
> 
Received on Sunday, 6 February 2011 16:30:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:50 UTC