W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > July 2004

Re: DC with RDF Modeling Questions

From: Thomas B. Passin <tpassin@comcast.net>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 14:41:30 -0400
Message-ID: <40FEB8DA.4000300@comcast.net>
To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org

Victor Lindesay wrote:
> Kurt and Thomas wrote:
> 
> 
>>No, use the full URI for the property.  You can define 
>>entities in a DTD 
>>to get an abbreviation:
>>
>>	rdf:ID='&dc;title'
>>
>>
>>><rdf:Property rdf:ID="dc:title"/>          <--- Is 
>>
>>'dc:title' OK to use
>>
>>>this way????  Should I use an entity instead of the prefix????
>>
>>Yes, use an entity as as above.  No QNames in attribute 
>>values, please.
> 
> 
> rdf:ID should be a NCName so this this still wrong.
> http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/#rdf-id
> 

Whoops, I overlooked the "ID" part!  You're right.  Just for 
completeness, the full URI (with a possible entity shorthand - 
&dc;title) is used in attribute values like rdf:about.  But rdf:ID is 
like an xml ID type (although without a DTD or schema it probably can't 
literally be one.  The Rec spells this out - the ID value is used in 
conjunction with an xml:base value to build an effective URI.  All such 
URIs are given a "#" sign between the base URI and the ID value. So if 
you want a slash instead of a hash you are out of luck.

I recall being bit by this in the past, and now I try to avoid using 
rdf:ID for these reasons.  Sorry for the erroneous response.

Cheers,

Tom P

-- 
Thomas B. Passin
Explorer's Guide to the Semantic Web (Manning Books)
http://www.manning.com/catalog/view.php?book=passin
Received on Wednesday, 21 July 2004 14:37:40 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 5 February 2014 07:14:58 UTC