Re: URI Comparisons: RFC 2616 vs. RDF

On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 5:15 AM, Nathan <nathan@webr3.org> wrote:

> As far as I can see, that's only for a URI reference used within a
> namespace, and does not govern usage or normalization when you join the URI
> reference up with the local name to make the full URI.
>
> Out of interest, where is that process defined? I was looking for it the
> other day - for instance in the quoted specification we have the example:
>
> <edi:price xmlns:edi='http://ecommerce.example.org/schema'
> units='Euro'>32.18</edi:price>
>
> Where's the bit of the XML specification which says you join them up by
> concatenating 'http://ecommerce.example.org/schema' with #(?assumed?) and
> 'Euro' to get 'http://ecommerce.example.org/schema#Euro'?
>

My understanding is that this is governed by the definition of qnames. As I
understand things, the concatenation you write would happen only if the
attribute was defined in the schema to be an xsi:type
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-1-20041028/structures.html#xsi_type,
and without the "#". The only case where a "#" would be added is when rdf:id
or xml:id is used.

And finally, this is why I specifically asked if the non-normalization of
> RDF URI References had XML Namespace heritage, which had then filtered down
> through OWL, SPARQL and RIF.
>

I don't believe so. I believe the genesis are the reasons that I discussed
earlier - the difficulty of actually implementing it combined with the
indeterminacy. But I would be glad if someone else has better information
and can either confirm or deny this.

-Alan