RE: Update to XLink -> RDF mapping

Thanks for the comments...

A follow-up question for the various groups who get this.

In the case that no arcrole attribute was specified,
I put in the stuff about using the element type as the
arc role. My thinking was that this would be a common
case, and while such inference will lead to more errors, it
will also allow harvesting of a much wider range of resources.

But as Pierre-Antoine correctly points out, it is not safe
in general to make up a URI by concatenating the namespace
URI and the element type.

Options:
1) Leave as-is (it says that implementations 'may' do this).
2) Delete, only harvest statements when an arc-role is
   specified. ("First do no harm" :-)
3) Leave as 'may' and add a note on the dangers.
4) Generate a standard relation, such as Pierre-Antoine's
   suggestion of
	http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink/properties/arc 
5) Something else?

Your opinions please.
Ron