W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-comments@w3.org > January to March 2003

Re: What does RDF consider a namespace to be?

From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2003 10:48:57 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20030221104046.00aa8490@127.0.0.1>
To: "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>, Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org

Peter,

Thank you for clarifying.

In this case, as the issue is not specific to RDF Concepts, I shall ask 
Brian, as WG chair and series editor, to pick this up and lead the handling 
of this comment.

#g
--

At 01:37 PM 2/19/03 -0500, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:

>From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
>Subject: Re: What does RDF consider a namespace to be?
>Date: Tue, 18 Feb 2003 19:38:06 +0000
>
> > Peter,
> >
> > With reference to your message:
> > 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0150.html
> >
> > You cite the RDF Concepts document, but I'm not sure what kind of change
> > you are asking for here.
> >
> > As I understand it, the question is concerned with whether a namespace is
> > invariant, or can names be added and removed?
>
>Yes.
>
> > This question seems to have no bearing on the definition or interpretation
> > of RDF.  Are there any specific problems raised by this issue, or examples
> > of RDF whose interpretation is ill-defined, or do you have specific
> > suggestions for changes to the text?
>
>It has bearing on whether RDF is using the same notion as is used in other
>W3C document.
>
>There is, of course, no internal inconsistency in the RDF documents if they
>use a notion of finite, changable namespaces.
>
>RDF is, probably, free to define its own version of namespace.  However, I
>think that it would be better to have RDF use terms in the samy way as they
>are used in other W3C recommendations.
>
>
>I'm not proposing any particular change to the wording.  This is not a
>comment about wording, but is instead a comment about the relationship
>between RDF documents and other W3C documents.
>
>
> > #g
>
>Peter F. Patel-Schneider
>Bell Labs Research
>Lucent Technologies
>
> > --
> >
> > At 10:03 AM 1/30/03 -0500, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
> >
> >
> > >What does RDF consider a namespace to be?
> > >
> > >It appears to me that the XML namespaces document makes XML namespace
> > >simply be the set of URI references that share a common prefix.  Therefore
> > >all XML namespaces contain an infinite and unchanging set of URI
> > >references.
> > >
> > >However, Concepts says that ''Some terms in these namespaces have been
> > >deprecated, some have been added, ...''  which appears to indicate 
> that the
> > >names in the namespace can be changed.  Does RDF actually use a different
> > >meaning of a namespace than is used in XML?
> > >
> > >Other places in the RDF documents also seem to indicate that RDF considers
> > >namespaces to have finite and changing sets of URI references.  For
> > >example, Section 5.1 of RDF Syntax says
> > >
> > >         The [RDF] namespace contains the following names only:
> > >         ...
> > >         Any other names are not defined ....
> > >
> > >Concepts says
> > >
> > >         Vocabulary terms defined in the rdfs: namespace are defined 
> in the
> > >         RDF schema vocabulary specification ....
> >
> > -------------------
> > Graham Klyne
> > <GK@NineByNine.org>

-------------------
Graham Klyne
<GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Friday, 21 February 2003 13:07:23 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Friday, 21 September 2012 14:16:31 GMT