W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > June 2001

Re: XML:Base - impact on RDF (first pass)

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2001 10:23:49 -0500
Message-ID: <3B1CF985.C87BED81@w3.org>
To: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
CC: RDFCore Working Group <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Jan Grant wrote:
> 
> I've made a cursory "this is what changes/needs thinking about" skim of
> xml:base and the M+S document; I'd encourage people to contribute
> anything else that I've missed here.
> 
> RDF is serialised as an XML document. Thus, xml:base would appear to
> have an impact. You'd think so, anyway, at least if an RDF parser is
> built on top of an xml:base-compliant XML tokeniser.

There's no such thing as an "xml:base-compliant XML tokeniser."
Please be very careful when using
terms from the specs, especially terminology about conformance.

The xml:base spec speaks only of conformance of applications:

[[[
5. Conformance 

        An application conforms to XML Base if it calculates base
        URIs in accordance with the conditions set forth in this
        specification.
]]]

--        XML Base
http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlbase/#conformance
http://www.w3.org/TR/2000/PR-xmlbase-20001220/#conformance
Wed, 20 Dec 2000 18:44:19 GMT

and even that is goofy; I think by "application" it
means things like HTML, not pieces of software (cf
the examples in the spec). To
speak of HTML calculating something is odd. I think
it should be:

	An application conforms to XML Base if the parts
	of its syntax (attribute values, for example) that
	are specified to be URI references are to be
	absolutized in accordance with the conditions
	set forth in this specification.

I guess I should tell the editors that.


> With the inclusion of an interpretation for xml:base attributes:
> 
> - relative URIs appearing in rdf:about, rdf:resource, rdf:type
>   attributes should probably be resolved relative to the xml:base
> (according to the xml:base spec and normal resolution of relative URIs)

"should probably"? With the inclusion of xml:base, they MUST,
right?


[...]

-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Tuesday, 5 June 2001 11:23:58 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:37:01 EDT