W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > April to June 2001

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

From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2001 11:17:04 -0500
Message-ID: <3AE6F880.9C2E292A@w3.org>
To: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@swartzfam.com>
CC: RDF Comments <www-rdf-comments@w3.org>, Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>, Art Barstow <barstow@w3.org>
[not copied to the WG...]

Aaron Swartz wrote:
> 
> Re: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Apr/0047.html
> 
> > [[
> >   All elements and attributes in RDF must be namespace qualified
> > ]]
> 
> What is the reasoning for "all elements" being part of this requirement?

Because that's the way it's always been; no change is
suggested regarding elements, I don't think.

> Many current RDF documents use default namespaces properly to default
> elements.

Right; such elements are namespace qualified.

> Is there a reason for disqualifying this practice?

No, using the default namespace on elements is fine.

Just note that there *is* *no* default namespace for attributes;
so you need a colon in them every time.

Getting exactly the right wording for issues like this
is practially impossible; no matter what words you choose,
somebody gets confused. We really need examples/test cases.

I'm in the middle of something else just now...


-- 
Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Wednesday, 25 April 2001 12:18:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:28 GMT