Re: Namespace for prov specs

Is the issue between the two the # character? I think the problem with the
XML namespaces is that there is already a character that separates the
local part from the namespace, but the combination of the two isn't
actually considered its own URI. Personally, I feel this is a problem with
the design of XML, but I'm sure XMLers would have similar opinions about
RDF.

Jim

On Thu, Mar 22, 2012 at 4:45 AM, Luc Moreau <L.Moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk>wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I am keen that we avoid the problem of xsd namespace, which is:
>
> http://www.w3.org/2001/**XMLSchema# <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#>in rdf
> and
> http://www.w3.org/2001/**XMLSchema <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema> in
> xml.
>
> What is the implication of choosing
>
> http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
>
>
> for the PROV XML schema?
>
> Would the XML schema namespace be
>
> http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
>
> or would it be
>
> http://www.w3.org/ns/prov
>
>
> Thoughts?
> Luc
>
>
>
> On 03/22/2012 07:39 AM, Paul Groth wrote:
>
>> I would suggest the default be html. In general, when people dereference
>> the namespace then a we page seems most appropriate.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>> On Mar 21, 2012, at 23:12, Stian Soiland-Reyes<soiland-reyes@**
>> cs.manchester.ac.uk <soiland-reyes@cs.manchester.ac.uk>>  wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> Sounds good to me. Not all tools are good enough to send the
>>> appropriate Accept header, so would the default (when no HTML is
>>> requested) be to go to the RDF/XML OWL file?
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 08:09, Paul Groth<p.t.groth@vu.nl>  wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>> Hi All,
>>>>
>>>> Can we resolve the namespaces to be used for prov?
>>>>
>>>> This is ISSUE-256 ,  ISSUE-84 , ISSUE-224, ISSUE-281
>>>>
>>>> Here's the suggestion that seems to stem from the discussion
>>>>
>>>> Namespace is:
>>>> http://www.w3.org/ns/prov#
>>>>
>>>> This dereferences to a landing page that points to prov-dm and prov-o if
>>>> requesting html
>>>>
>>>> The landing page would like:
>>>> - http://www.w3.org/ns/sparql-**service-description#<http://www.w3.org/ns/sparql-service-description#>
>>>> - or optionally be like the glossary given in
>>>> https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/**raw-file/fd022426796d/model/**
>>>> prov-glossary.html<https://dvcs.w3.org/hg/prov/raw-file/fd022426796d/model/prov-glossary.html>
>>>>
>>>> Otherwise, conneg would be set to return the appropriate data file
>>>> depending
>>>> on the request.
>>>>
>>>> I.e .rdt / .ttl depending on the request
>>>>
>>>> See suggestion in ISSUE-281
>>>>
>>>> Is there any disagreement with this approach?
>>>>
>>>> Thanks
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Stian Soiland-Reyes, myGrid team
>>> School of Computer Science
>>> The University of Manchester
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Professor Luc Moreau
> Electronics and Computer Science   tel:   +44 23 8059 4487
> University of Southampton          fax:   +44 23 8059 2865
> Southampton SO17 1BJ               email: l.moreau@ecs.soton.ac.uk
> United Kingdom                     http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~**lavm<http://www.ecs.soton.ac.uk/~lavm>
>
>
>


-- 
Jim McCusker
Programmer Analyst
Krauthammer Lab, Pathology Informatics
Yale School of Medicine
james.mccusker@yale.edu | (203) 785-6330
http://krauthammerlab.med.yale.edu

PhD Student
Tetherless World Constellation
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
mccusj@cs.rpi.edu
http://tw.rpi.edu