W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xg-webid@w3.org > November 2011

Re: different publish RDF in section 2.4.2

From: Mischa Tuffield <mischa@mmt.me.uk>
Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 14:56:50 +0000
Cc: WebID Incubator Group WG <public-xg-webid@w3.org>
Message-Id: <9A24EA31-C6D5-4DF0-A27A-CE0DB4489623@mmt.me.uk>
To: Dominik Tomaszuk <ddooss@wp.pl>
Hi All, 

Apologies if I am butting into this conversation and someone else has already mentioned this but : 


> 2) I think we should also provide embeded Turtle. Now in Turtle draft it is possible to do it in <script> element [1]:
> <script type="text/turtle">
> @prefix : <http://www.w3.org/ns/auth/cert#> .
> @prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#> .
> @prefix foaf: <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/> .
> @prefix bob: <https://bob.example/profile#> .
> bob:me a foaf:Person;
>  foaf:name "Joe";
>  :key [ a :RSAPublicKey;
>    :modulus "00cb24ed85d64..."^^xsd:hexBinary;
>    :exponent 65537 ;
>    ] .
> </script>
> or
> <script type="text/turtle" src="profile.ttl"></script>
> [1] Section Turtle in HTML and/or XHTML https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-turtle/index.html

You are citing a random version of an Editor's Draft from a dcvs repository in [1], my bet is that this wont get into the standard, but I could be wrong on this one. Your link [1] states in red "Editor's Draft", the current published version can be found on : http://www.w3.org/TR/turtle/. 

Given that the thing you cite is a random Editor's Draft, you can have no assurances at all that it will be in the final draft of Turtle, when it gets standardised later next year. 

Personally, I would stay clear of the above method. 

Warmest Regards,


> Best regards,
> Dominik 'domel' Tomaszuk

Mischa Tuffield
Email: mischa@mmt.me.uk
Homepage: http://mmt.me.uk/
WebID: http://mmt.me.uk/foaf.rdf#mischa
Received on Wednesday, 23 November 2011 14:57:21 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 23 November 2011 14:57:22 GMT