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

Re: parsers that don't need rdf:RDF?

From: Nikita Ogievetsky <nogievet@cogx.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Sep 2002 08:01:13 -0700
Message-ID: <048e01c26636$b96730d0$1101a8c0@VAIOCOGI>
To: "Jon Hanna" <jon@spin.ie>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>


From my limited experience with RDF processors
resolvability of RDF schema is a requirement.
For "bad days" you can set up a local proxy.
(it is generally a good idea to have these for
DC, PRISM and other "favorite" schemas)

The difference is that currently
processors will refuse to parse metadata if
one of the schemas is not resolvable.
With this proposal they will ignore or assume it to
be of "resource" parse type.


----- Original Message -----
From: "Jon Hanna" <jon@spin.ie>
To: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Sent: Friday, September 27, 2002 7:44 AM
Subject: RE: parsers that don't need rdf:RDF?

> > From: www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org
> > [mailto:www-rdf-interest-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Nikita Ogievetsky
> > Sent: 27 September 2002 15:37
> [snip]
> > Indeed, this "rdf:RDF" requirement makes otherwise compact RDF
> > somewhat bulky.
> > I would propose that processors may derive RDF-ness of the metadata
> > by resolving namespace URI to see if it is an RDF schema.
> > Otherwise it may just ignores the metadata.
> >
> > Currently most RDF processors require "resolvability" of  schema URI-s.
> > With this proposal they will only assume that they are parsing an RDF
> > fragment
> > if the namespace resolves to an RDF schema.
> On bad days nothing is resolvable!

Nikita Ogievetsky,  Consultant.     Cogitech Inc.
email: nogievet@cogx.com   phone: (917) 406-8734
web: http://www.cogx.com   Cogito Ergo XML

"Building, Aggregating and Navigating Information Systems."
New York Associated Topics Seminar. November 18, 2002
Received on Friday, 27 September 2002 11:01:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:56 GMT