- From: Jan Grant <Jan.Grant@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Wed, 12 Jun 2002 09:52:18 +0100 (BST)
- To: Patrick Stickler <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>
- cc: Pat Hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>, Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>, Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
On Wed, 12 Jun 2002, Patrick Stickler wrote: > > On 2002-06-12 7:23, "ext patrick hayes" <phayes@ai.uwf.edu> wrote: > > > ...instead, we (ie the RDF coreWG) assume that the W3C will > > eventually have the good sense to declare that a certain namespace is > > *globally* understood to be 'rdf-invisible', in that any triples > > which use urirefs from that namespace are not asserted in any RDF > > graph. > > Sorry to rain on the parade, but this is nonsense. Namespaces > are not significant nor represented in the RDF graph, and there > is no formal relationship between a URI and whatever namespace > prefix was used to hack it into the RDF/XML serialization. Agreed; I'd rather see some syntactic mechanism for darkening (or more generally, colouring*) triples that doesn't rely on URI inspection. In particular, URI inspection doesn't need to be written into the MT documents - it should just appeal to darkness (or otherwise) that's determined through a mechanism external to the document. jan * ie, contexts, again -- jan grant, ILRT, University of Bristol. http://www.ilrt.bris.ac.uk/ Tel +44(0)117 9287088 Fax +44 (0)117 9287112 RFC822 jan.grant@bris.ac.uk perl -e 's?ck?t??print:perl==pants if $_="Just Another Perl Hacker\n"'
Received on Wednesday, 12 June 2002 04:52:43 UTC