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

Re: Issue http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdf-ns-prefix-confusion

From: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@upclink.com>
Date: Fri, 18 May 2001 09:03:51 -0500
To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, w3c-rdfcore-wg <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <B72A870E.BC6C%aswartz@upclink.com>
Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk> wrote:

> 7.  Unprefixed attributes not on The List have no meaning in RDF
>    and MUST NOT be used to generate statements.   Processors MUST
>    also skip the element containing such attributes and generate no
>    statements for the entire XML element and content.
> 
> This is to explicitly say what is implict in the the BNF - unprefixed
> attributes have never been allowed in RDF/XML grammar.  I've gone a
> bit further to say what to do when they are seen so that there is
> so consistency in handling them.  This means that all namespace
> element/attribute prefixing is covered.

I do not think that this extra step is necessary. Take the innocent mistake:

<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="..." xmlns="..."
<rdf:Description title="Issues" author="Dave Beckett">
  <type rdf:resource="http://example.org/#image" />
</rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

The type information is still perfectly valid RDF. This "skip the element"
provision was added to ensure forwards compatibility with new
elements/attributes. Since (I hope that) RDF will not add any more
attributes which are allowed unprefixed this provision is not necessary.

Also, I too agree with Dan Connolly and would like to see the MUST changed
to a MAY, so that processors may accept the incorrect version of the
language for backwards compatibility, but it is not an accepted portion of
the language.

-- 
[ Aaron Swartz | me@aaronsw.com | http://www.aaronsw.com ]
Received on Friday, 18 May 2001 10:04:04 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:35:49 EDT