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

[PRISM] More comment dispositions

From: Ron Daniel <rdaniel@interwoven.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 14:14:20 -0800
To: "'Dan Connolly'" <connolly@w3.org>, "'Aaron Swartz'" <aswartz@swartzfam.com>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Cc: <spec-comments@prismstandard.org>
Message-ID: <003e01c0b89d$9ae2e070$6501a8c0@interwoven.com>
Another comment from Dan was:

>> * xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.0/basic/"
> I recommend "...basic#" rather than "...basic/", because 
> "...basic/" necessarily denotes an HTTP resource, i.e. a sort
> of generic document (i.e. a thing that responds to GET requests),
> but RDF properties and classes might turn out to be disjoint
> from HTTP resources. "...basic#foo" isn't
> constrained the way "...basic/foo" is.

For pragmatic reasons, specifically the concern over the
'download everything and dig through it' semantics of '#',
we will stick with the use of the '/' character.



Oh, this one was from Aaron:

> However, I do think it would be rather useful to get 
> something at those
> namespace URIs. RDDL will do just fine, and it has fragment 
> identifiers
> defined (both by XPointer and by HTML!).

Maybe later, but that is not required for the spec to work.
Concerns like that dominate my thinking since I have a lo
to do between now and April 9, when the 1.0 spec is released.

Ron
Received on Thursday, 29 March 2001 17:15:49 GMT

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