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

about:blank and schemes w/ CURIEs

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 22:52:17 +0000
Message-ID: <4D51C921.40909@webr3.org>
To: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
CC: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, RDFa Working Group <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
(note: topic change)

Am I correct in thinking it's only a problem for @about and @resource - 
since @href and @src don't accept CURIEs ?

This is seems like it may be the same as the http:// problem, and that 
we may have to pre-map all well known schemes such that ( "http:" -> 
"http:", "about:" -> "about:" ... ) .. ack, even if we do that the 
@prefix declaration would override the default wouldn't it - would we 
have to reserve the prefixes like xml does with xmlns, or disallow 
certain prefix mappings in RDFa / certain hosts? or?

Best,

Nathan

Toby Inkster wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Feb 2011 09:38:22 +0100
> Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org> wrote:
> 
>> On Feb 8, 2011, at 08:17 , Toby Inkster wrote:
>>
>>> If a consumer includes a default prefix mapping of something like:
>>>
>>> 	"about" => "http://example.com/vocab/about#"
>>>
>>> Then it will hit a compliance issue as soon as it sees:
>>>
>>> 	<span rel="next" resource="about:blank">this is the last  
>>> 	page</span>   
>> Why? I do not understand...
> 
> OK, we're assuming that the consumer is including a mapping of:
> 
> 	"about" => "http://example.com/vocab/about#"
> 
> which is not in the host language default profile, and not specified in
> the document. The intention of the document is to create the following
> triple:
> 
> 	<> xhv:next <about:blank> .
> 
> And that's what a conformant RDFa implementation should produce.
> However, if the implementation has that additional default mapping,
> then it will produce:
> 
> 	<> xhv:next <http://example.com/vocab/about#blank> .
> 
> Nathan wrote:
> 
>> about: isn't an IANA registered URI scheme
> 
> Not yet, but it's an Internet Draft expected to become an RFC (and thus
> a registered URI scheme).
> 
> Besides which, we don't specify that URI schemes used in RDFa must be
> registered. The following works in Turtle and I wouldn't want it to
> break in RDFa:
> 
> 	<#i> foaf:account <irc://irc.freenode.net/tobyink,isnick> .
> 
Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2011 22:54:14 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:51 UTC