W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > June 2002

RE: rdfs:isDefinedBy (Was Re: Representing DCMI semantics as RDF schemas versus Web pages)

From: Bill de hÓra <dehora@eircom.net>
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 00:26:24 +0100
To: "'Patrick Stickler'" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, "'DCMI'" <DC-ARCHITECTURE@jiscmail.ac.uk>, "'ext Dan Brickley'" <danbri@w3.org>
Cc: "'RDF Interest'" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000e01c20c1f$3ee85c10$887ba8c0@mitchum>

 
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


> -----Original Message-----
> From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org 
> [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Patrick
> Stickler 
>
> The spec says that all that namespaces are is punctuation. 
> That's it. If the web architecture needs more, fine, then 
> change the spec or define a new one, but don't try to read 
> more into the XML Namespaces spec.

I couldn't find the word punctuation in RDFS working draft or the
Namespaces recc. What do you mean?


> > danbri:
> > In the Web, it is very natural for resource identifiers to 
> resolve to 
> > their (possibly various) representations. In the Web,
> > namespaces  aren't magic, just another kind of resource. So we
> > put their  representations in the Web. It works pretty well.
> 
> This is the point of my disagreement. A namespace is 
> punctuation. It is a URI used not as a URI but as a globally 
> unique identifier the sole purpose of which is to be a 
> globally unique idenfier. Period.

Here's what the Namespaces recc says an XML namespace is:

[[[
[Definition:] An XML namespace is a collection of names, identified
by a URI reference [RFC2396], which are used in XML documents as
element types and attribute names. XML namespaces differ from the
"namespaces" conventionally used in computing disciplines in that
the XML version has internal structure and is not, mathematically
speaking, a set. These issues are discussed in "A. The Internal
Structure of XML Namespaces". 

]]]

Rereading the Namespaces recc, there is not enough information in
the document to favour treating XML namespaces as RDF resources or
not as RDF resources. Being XML Namespaces, that's not a surprise.
We're just going to have to make decision on this, based on the
definition of an XML namespace. The answer isn't going to be found
by trotting out the Namespaces Recommendation. 


> > danbri:
> > We even
> > provide a convenience relation, rdfs:isDefinedBy, to make it
> > easier  for apps that care to keep note of such information.
> 
> I disagree, Dan. The rdfs:isDefinedBy property does not point 
> to a namespace, but to a resource. 

Here's the question: Are XML namespaces RDF resources? If a
collection of names identified by a URI reference can be an RDF
resource, then an XML namespace can be an RDF resource. 

Bill de hÓra


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: PGP 7.0.4

iQA/AwUBPP1MauaWiFwg2CH4EQLcxACdFSLxyo2bM3/FPkuzK4Gvxjrjt9kAn0SG
GvCOUAXhOKtHRTeDpzoqCX4M
=uu6G
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Tuesday, 4 June 2002 19:28:45 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:54 GMT