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

Modularity ojection Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-61: Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper

From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 11:06:00 -0500
Cc: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Message-Id: <3F8F8004-3AE2-4425-9ED8-AA1D79DDF7AA@w3.org>
To: Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>
 Modularity

I feel that having a global namespace prefix map associated with a store is useful for 
small applications, but bad for large ones.

Take for example an RDF system run by a browser,
in which everything which happens is stored, including the HTTP request/response
history, and information pulled from any pages the user loads.

This is used, ay, by many add-ons and plugs and applets which 
the user may install to access the data.

The problem is, that while these apps must access the same store, they 
cannot assume that they share ideas about prefixes.

This problem is exacerbated when apps use common libraries
which deal with certain types of data (say social data or statistical data).
Those common libraries must be able to be written using shorthand for
the namespaces they deal with -- but without danger of polluting 
or conflicting with the namespaces in the

Javascript already has a dangerous global namespace which
developers of libraries have learned to almost completely avoid.
typically each library adds just one term to that global symbol space.

We already have similar problems with CSS classes in 
javascript libraries -- there are dangers of clashes between classes 
added by different libraries. 

Ideally, any local names have javascript scope. This is why 
foafname = foaf('name')  is safe, and why 
foadname = $rdf.resolve("foaf:name") is not.


Tim
Received on Tuesday, 4 January 2011 16:06:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 27 April 2012 04:55:08 GMT