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

Re: Attention Users! (2 in a series)

From: Uche Ogbuji <uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Jul 2001 18:26:56 -0600
Message-Id: <200107140026.f6E0Qur30568@localhost.local>
To: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org, "RDF-Interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>, dorait@msn.com
> On Friday, July 6, 2001, at 10:40  AM, Uche Ogbuji wrote:
> 
> > "Usage of an rdf:ID attribute to identify the subject of a 
> > description, is
> > equivalent to usage of an rdf:about attribute with the same content,
> > except the content of the rdf:about attribute is prefixed by 
> > a '#' character
> > and URI encoded."
> >
> > shouldn't that be
> >
> > "except the content of the rdf:ID attribute"?
> 
> Hmm, how about:
> 
> "Usage of an rdf:ID attribute to identify the subject of a 
> description, is
> equivalent to usage of an rdf:about attribute with the the '#' 
> character followed by the URI-encoded form of the content rdf:ID 
> attribute."
> 
> http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-
> tests/rdfcore/rdfms-difference-between-ID-and-about/

Much clearer.  Thanks.


> > I agree with this, except that perhaps rdf:ID should simply be 
> > suppressed.
> 
> I'd like that, but I don't see how to do it within the 
> constraints of our charter.
> 
> >> Proposal 2: No writeup available yet
> >> Generate rdfs:isDefinedBy triples when rdf:ID is used.
> >
> > Interesting.  I'll have to give this some thought.  A write-up 
> > with examples
> > would be quite helpful.
> 
> Basically, it'd be something like:
> 
> <http://example.org/test1.rdf#foo> rdfs:isDefinedBy 
> <http://example.org/test1.rdf> .
> 
> In addition to the usual stuff.

I'm still missing something.  Given the following example:

<rdf:Description rdf:ID="aga" xmlns:x="http://rdfs.hellas.com">
  <x:ending>memnon</x:ending>
  <x:ref rdf:resource="http://hellas.com/aga">
</rdf:Description>

What would be the isDefinedBy triple added here?


> >> Are there issues that you would like to see RDF Core address
> >> right away? Please let us know:
> > Clarifying rdf:value.  I change my mind about what it *really* 
> > means everytime
> > I read the spec or see an example.  If it isn't in the grammar 
> > because it's
> > merely an RDF property, then this should be clearly explained, 
> > and preferably
> > the semantics of this property should be elucidated.
> >
> > I know there's already an issue open for this.  I just think 
> > it's a matter of
> > priority because of the numerous interpretations.
> 
> Thanks, I've told the WG about this.
> 
> See: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2001Jul/0051

I was unable to get to this page (network error).


-- 
Uche Ogbuji                               Principal Consultant
uche.ogbuji@fourthought.com               +1 303 583 9900 x 101
Fourthought, Inc.                         http://Fourthought.com 
4735 East Walnut St, Boulder, CO 80301-2537, USA
XML strategy, XML tools (http://4Suite.org), knowledge management
Received on Saturday, 14 July 2001 03:46:55 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:50 GMT