W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > February 2001

Re: What are allowable property URIs?

From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>
Date: Thu, 15 Feb 2001 16:33:51 -0500
Message-ID: <01fd01c09796$fe30bf30$0a2e249b@nemc.org>
To: "Aaron Swartz" <aswartz@swartzfam.com>, "Gabe Beged-Dov" <begeddov@jfinity.com>
Cc: "Dan Brickley" <danbri@w3.org>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Aaron Swartz wrote:
> Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net> wrote:
>
> >> In such a system, how would I represent any URI without a "#" in it?
> > as is. All I've done is to define a protocol for the conversion of a
QName
> > into a URI reference.
>
> Exactly, but you force all the predicate URI references to contain the
> character # or _.  This doesn't fix the problem.
>

It doesn't 'force' anything. It simply defines a conversion of qnames to
URIs. URI references indicated by any other mechanism than a QName (e.g.
rdf:resource, rdf:about, rdf:predicate etc.) are free to include any URI
that is pleased. Since a QName doesn't directly refer to a URI in any case,
I can't see how changing the current specification from simple concatenation
of [namespace URI + localname] to [namespace URI + '#' + localname] could
cause any real problem.  We have already shown that the current behavior
works poorly or not at all for many applications -- in particular when
namespace URIs don't end in "#" or "/" -- and worse is not compatible with
other W3C recs such as XML Schema.

Rather than continue to spin our wheels on this issue, can you give a
specific example of a problem with my proposal i.e. a specific example with
specific URIs where this creates a problem **

-Jonathan

** note: I can think of one particular issue but I think people need to
think this through.
Received on Thursday, 15 February 2001 16:48:06 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:48 GMT