W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ldp-wg@w3.org > January 2013

relative URIs in examples

From: Henry Story <henry.story@bblfish.net>
Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 12:40:53 +0100
Message-Id: <BC918061-1A10-46D5-BB3D-E73C9788A244@bblfish.net>
To: public-ldp-wg@w3.org
I think all examples are using full URIs when relative ones
would do. E.g Example 1.

[[
# The following is the representation of
#    http://example.org/container1
@prefix dcterms: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/>.
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>.
@prefix ldp: <http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#>.

<http://example.org/container1>
   a ldp:Container;
   dcterms:title "A very simple container";
   rdfs:member
      <http://example.org/container1/member1>,
      <http://example.org/container1/member2>,
      <http://example.org/container1/member3>.
]]

This would be  better written as

[[
# The following is the representation of
#    http://example.org/container1
@prefix dcterms: <http://purl.org/dc/terms/>.
@prefix rdfs: <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#>.
@prefix ldp: <http://www.w3.org/ns/ldp#>.

<> a ldp:Container;
   dcterms:title "A very simple container";
   rdfs:member <member1>, <member2>, <member3> .
]]

This was in fact decided as part of ISSUE-29 "Relative URIs
are crucial" and it is Action-30 for Steve Speicher. 
http://www.w3.org/2012/ldp/track/actions/30

But I just thought I'd nudge this one as I noticed it.

Henry

A short message from my sponsors: Vive la France!
Social Web Architect
http://bblfish.net/


Received on Monday, 14 January 2013 11:41:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:17:36 UTC