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

Re: a URI is a name (tel uri scheme and VCARD RDF)

From: Alexander Jerusalem <ajeru@vknn.org>
Date: Tue, 26 Nov 2002 16:56:59 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20021126164552.021c48d0@pop.gmx.net>
To: "Nikita Ogievetsky" <nogievet@cogx.com>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>

At 19:26 25.11.2002 -0800, Nikita Ogievetsky wrote:
>Alexander Jerusalem wrote:
>
> > Hmm, I think the problem with your solution is that the two statements do
> > not have the same subject. Shouldn't it rather be something like:
> >
> > <rdf:Description rdf:about="12345678901234567890">
> >    <rtm:shortname>W3C</rtm:shortname>
> >    <rtm:weburi>http://www.w3c.org"</rtm:weburi>
> > </rdf:Description>
> >
> > I know that the rdf:about as above is not valid RDF, I just want to
> > illustrate that the contents of the id should be completely meaningless.
> > For RDF compliance it should probably be something along the lines of
> > rdf:about="urn:12345678901234567890".
>
>Sure. May I just correct you that
>"contents of the id MAY be completely meaningless".
>I made it sound English to help convey my point.

The problem is not that your IDs are english but that the IDs of your two 
statements are not the same. They are "w3c" and "w3cwebsite" respectively. 
I thought what you wanted to say was that the *same* thing was indicatedBy 
and constitutedBy "www.w3c.org" whereas what your statements assert now is 
that one thing (w3c) is indicatedBy "www.w3c.org" and some other thing 
"w3cwebsite" is constitutedBy "www.w3c.org". I presume now that this is 
what you wanted to say, isn't it?
Received on Tuesday, 26 November 2002 11:56:06 GMT

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