Re: URN as namespace URI for RDF Schema

Hi Michael,

a new (and perhaps shorter) answer.

Es begab sich aber zu der Zeit 04.10.2004 17:07,  da Michael Steidl/MDir 
IPTC schrieb:

>We intend to create a specific RDF Schema within an RDF system of another party 
>- and hence have to identify our resources by our own namespace. 
>  
>
yes. do it.

>Looking at the RDF specs and a lot of examples I found virtually all RDF 
>namespaces are made from the http URI schema and all have as last character a # 
>or a /. 
>
>This raises these questions:
>
>- is there anywhere a written requirement for having only URIs from the http 
>schema.
>  
>
no. But it is a *social practice*. It's somehow "polite" to do it like this.
(because we may check if your properties are on the www to see what they 
mean)

>- where does this #- or /-sign requirement come from
>  
>
i would say: namespace use. In XML documents, we usually have the xmlns 
declarations and we abbreviate the things bevore the last / or #.
again - *social practice*.

>- Finally: as we usually specify all our XML namespaces with URIs from the URN 
>schema would this be possible for a RDF Schema - as URNs don't allow for having 
>/- and #-signs.
>  
>
please post one of your urn's. They probably do not conform to the urn 
spec anyhow (as this spec is quite wild)
For schemas I would strongly recommend not to use urns and instead use 
normal http urls.

*definition social practice: *
 >90% of people do it.
if you stick to it, it helps to make things look familiar when we use 
your schemes.
*do not write your schemes by looking at the specs.
write them by copying from *
http://www.schemaweb.info

think of the story of the www: everybody knew how to do HTML because we 
all copied the source of everybody else ;-)

cheers
Leo