Fragment identifier use case (was 2002-02-25#19, Fragment identif iers, words for the primer)

Hi Aaron,

I took a quick look around but did not see any test cases or
usage scenarios around this issue. Here's a case (from PRISM
of course :-), where we have used '#'. Can you suggest how
this should be changed so as not to use it?


The rights language part of the PRISM spec defines the property
prl:usage whose value says whether a resource can or can't be
used if some accompanying conditions hold true. The value SHOULD
be a URI reference to an entry in a controlled vocabulary that
is also defined by PRISM.

For example, the RDF description below says that the image
(.../Corfu.jpg) can't be used (#none) in the tobacco industry
(code 21 in SIC, the Standard Industrial Classifications).

<rdf:RDF xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/basic/1.0/"
         xmlns:prl="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/prl/1.0/"
         xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
         xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
 <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://wanderlust.com/2000/08/Corfu.jpg">
  <dc:rights  rdf:parseType="Resource"
 
xml:base="http://prismstandard.org/vocabularies/1.0/usage.xml">
   <prl:usage rdf:resource="#none"/>
   <prl:industry rdf:resource="http://prismstandard.org/vocabs/SIC/21"/>
  </dc:rights>
 </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>

(Digression: Since SIC is relatively large, I choose to use '/' instead of
'#' in its
URLs. For copyright reasons, the SIC URL will not resolve to anything, so
its form is probably not too important.
[To be pedantic, copyright is not a problem for SIC since it comes from
the US government. However, other vocabularies like the ISO 3166-2 subregion
codes would have such copyright problems. As a general rule the PRISM group
does not provide the content of vocabularies defined by others, although we
may define rules for constructing URIs for the items in the vocabulary if
the owner has not done so already.]
)


The #none is intended to identify one concept, which is defined in a file
along with a few other concepts around usage. The file's URL is
http://prismstandard.org/vocabularies/1.0/usage.xml.
That file is defined by PRISM and looks something like:

<!-- usage.xml:  Small vocabulary of usages for PRISM Rights Language -->
<rdf:RDF xmlns:pcv="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/pcv/1.0/"
         xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#">
 <rdf:Description rdf:about="">

  <pcv:Descriptor rdf:ID="none">
   <pcv:label>None</pcv:label>
   <pcv:description>The resource may not be used under the accompanying
     conditions.
   </pcv:description>
  </pcv:Descriptor>

  [... Descriptors for #use, #notApplicable, and #permissionsUnknown follow
...]

 </rdf:Description>
</rdf:RDF>


How do you recommend users of the RDF spec define concepts in small
vocabularies (which may also be in RDF) and refer to them as the
value of an rdf:resource atttribute in RDF descriptions?


Thanks,
Ron

Received on Wednesday, 13 March 2002 13:40:34 UTC