Re: Decomposing a URI into its components

> [snip]
>
> So, the nice trick would be to make sure your "uri" namespace prefix is
> properly dereferenceable, so that once you've provided these
> definitions, folks can just use uri:scheme, etc, as if they were
> builtins.  I think that will work, or at least it should.  (You might
> need to give cwm certain flags.  It's been some years since I used that
> feature.)  If you think about what you're doing as providing a standard
> library for parsing URIs, then it may not seem quite so messy.
>
>      -- Sandro


Thanks for this suggestion, Sandro.

However, let me provide some more details on my purposes, which I hope
may be of interest to the people working on N3/Cwm.

I'm participating to the W3C POWDER WG [1], which aims at defining
standard Description Resources (DRs) to be used to describe
content/characteristics of Web resources.

In its current definition, a DR consists of three parts: a description,
a scope (denoting the set of resources to which the description apply),
and an attribution (who is claiming that). This is expressed by using an
RDF vocabulary we are currently working on, but we are considering also
how to map a DR into a rule.

Actually, we are currently studying how to map DR to N3 rules. In fact,
the scope of a DR is primarily defined in terms of its URI, and thus we
may have DRs stating that a given description applies to all the
resources hosted by "*.example.org" or "*example.net", with a path
starting with "foo" or "bar", etc. This is the reason of my questions.

More details on DR scopes can be found in an online document [2] and in
the POWDER public mailing list [3].

Of course, any comment will be more than welcome.

Andrea


[1]http://www.w3.org/2007/powder/
[2]http://www.w3.org/2007/powder/powder-grouping/conjunction
[3]http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-powderwg/2007May/0006.html

Received on Thursday, 24 May 2007 13:33:12 UTC