W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > September 2002

RE: XML Base - should be used

From: <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Date: Tue, 3 Sep 2002 08:44:00 +0300
Message-ID: <A03E60B17132A84F9B4BB5EEDE57957B160C26@trebe006.europe.nokia.com>
To: <jjc@hpl.hp.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>


The datatyping spec already does. ;-)

Patrick

> -----Original Message-----
> From: ext Jeremy Carroll [mailto:jjc@hpl.hp.com]
> Sent: 02 September, 2002 16:27
> To: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
> Subject: XML Base - should be used
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I would like to suggest that:
> - any test cases with relative URIs should use XML Base
> - any examples in any of our documents that use relative URIs 
> should use XML 
> Base
> - that the syntax and primer documents should suggest that 
> the use of XML Base 
> is preferred.
> 
> Note: rdf:ID introduces relative URIs.
> 
> The sort of use that I envisage is that where a document on 
> the web includes 
> an xml:base declaration which gives the documents usual base URL.
> 
> Not including such base uris makes teh document ambiguous.
> 
> For example if I GET
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-not-id-and-r
> esource-attr/test001.rdf
> 
> then the triples that I find are those in
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-not-id-and-r
esource-attr/test001.nt

However, if I get

http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-not-id-and-resource-attr/test001

then I get different triples, and these are not the ones in any nt file in the 
test area.

Similarly I might get

http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-not-id-and-resource-attr/test001.rdf

or

http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-not-id-and-resource-%61ttr/test001.rdf

and get different results.

(Sorry to raise this so late; I have only recently noticed this)

Jeremy






http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdf-containers-syntax-vs-schema/test004.rdf
Received on Tuesday, 3 September 2002 01:44:03 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:50:55 EDT