Re: xsd:anyURI syntax

Isn't it the case that not all URIs will have defined domains? The other 
possibility is that the domain is not what you wish to use for validation.

Then again, I'm considering the use of as one option, not the only option.

kc

On 3/3/15 8:34 PM, Holger Knublauch wrote:
> Spawning off a thread on the choice of using xsd:anyURI. I anticipate it
> is pretty obvious which syntax most users would prefer:
>
>    shacl:classScope"http://example.org/Person"^^xsd:anyURI ;
>
> or
>
>    shacl:classScope ex:Person ;
>
> so maybe you should clarify why you made that suggestion. You quoted
> "representational purity" and "to separate use and mention" but as a WG
> member I would not want to receive death threats from users who are no
> longer allowed to write qnames in their Turtle and JSON-LD files :)
>
> So what practical problems do you anticipate if they would be proper IRI
> nodes?
>
> Thanks,
> Holger
>
>
> On 3/4/2015 13:32, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>> I have attached a couple of examples.  (They get too messed up if I
>> put them
>> in line.)
>>
>> peter
>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>> Version: GnuPG v1
>>
>> iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJU9ny/AAoJECjN6+QThfjzaeAH/0AItq5S/KPjsVuW3vbSx3aM
>> e3xYRm6nu8p1ulpt3PQdXNpX3O+FsdQigYEMFkUEEl3YyOgaJBOLqVXJI0mjqZyw
>> xo/GvnH1vmH+05qSHs/yq1N20+GbzdXoYjlGuvIpMKSig57ktv8DigqcU48hwgFw
>> p/Qqq4iDk0UKuno3tZohlCR4akXWuHyn3udSo1rWsVYldcoV7oBlDyAME3RhrK/C
>> 0TteBPBuKOdAc9DdwOAbXqB3dxCApveCp6kwEa/stMWJ/QQz3NnvhIO/KMPeNJRC
>> 7S6S144Tie2WFNsDgfHiCEhXxR0FZYWsWAyz7FV7xODI42VGSpYVmSxCdiqm/8I=
>> =XS8w
>> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
>
>
>

-- 
Karen Coyle
kcoyle@kcoyle.net http://kcoyle.net
m: 1-510-435-8234
skype: kcoylenet/+1-510-984-3600

Received on Wednesday, 4 March 2015 14:55:15 UTC