W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > November 2010

Re: ACTION-502: RDFa and fragid semantics

From: Tim Berners-Lee <timbl@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Nov 2010 18:42:10 -0500
Cc: Jonathan Rees <jar@creativecommons.org>, www-tag@w3.org, Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
Message-Id: <45A222BF-A934-43FE-95C0-9C0121717698@w3.org>
To: nathan@webr3.org
Well, not really.

A general way of saying it is that the fragid is a document-global identifier in 
whatever language.   You invent a new language, and 
it get s new global identifiers

So in a javascript module, for example,  I would expect
foo.js#bar to be the  global variable bar in the file foo.

It is really important to be able to ivent new languages,
and so it hard to say how theyr global address space will work.

In the case of HTML and RDFA, we have a mixture of languages
so an localid  can either identify an HTML anchor or a RDF concept.

I don't like the idea of things being both.


On 2010-11 -29, at 18:29, Nathan wrote:

> Jonathan Rees wrote:
>> Re ACTION-502: Report back on discussions with Ben Adida regarding
>> fragid semantics for RDFa
>> According to RFC 3986, a "fragment's format and resolution is
>> ... dependent on the media type of a potentially retrieved
>> representation".
> Would it be possible to have a generic web scale fragment processing rule which applies when a media-type does not specifically provide it's own processing rules, and indeed to which they can defer if the question is ever asked?
> Best,
> Nathan
Received on Monday, 29 November 2010 23:42:15 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:33:08 UTC