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

RE: "Resource" (RDF vocabulary definitions)

From: David Menendez <zednenem@psualum.com>
Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2002 00:54:08 -0500
Message-Id: <a05111b19ba04c333a5ec@[10.0.1.2]>
To: "RDF-Interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

At 11:12 AM +0000 2002-11-22, Jon Hanna wrote:
>  > What about URI references which include fragment identifiers? My
>>  reading of RFC 2396 is that <http://example.org/> and
>>  <http://example.org/#foo> refer to the same resource.
>
>In the case of http://example.org/#foo the URI (http://example.org/) is a
>URI identifying a resource. The fragment identifier (#foo) is either:
>
>a. meaningless.
>b. An identifier of a resource that is part of the resource identified by
>the URI.
<snip>
>any system that uses URIRefs in an opaque manner (such as RDF) must 
>assume that a URIRef with a fragment identifier refers to a 
>different resource to the same URIRef without the fragment

Sounds good to me. I must have missed the part of RFC 2396 which 
discusses resources that are part of other resources.

I guess some of my confusion/concern about fragment identifiers in 
RDF is coming from the discussion in RDF Concepts [1], particularly 
the part where it states:

>we assume that the URI part (i.e. excluding fragment identifier) 
>indicates a Web resource with an RDF representation. So when 
>someurl#frag is used in an RDF document, someurl is presumed to 
>designate an RDF document.

If I have a some fragment of an HTML document, like a weblog posting, 
and it has a URI reference like <http://example.org/00231#b>, and I 
want to say something like
   <http://example.org/00231#b> dc:creator "Joe Example".
is that precluded by the presumption that <http://example.org/00231> 
is an RDF document instead of, say, an HTML document? I'm not sure 
how to interpret what that section says.

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#xtocid103660
-- 
Dave Menendez - zednenem@psualum.com - http://www.eyrie.org/~zednenem/
Received on Saturday, 23 November 2002 00:53:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:57 GMT