Re: review of prov-xml

On Wed, Feb 27, 2013 at 8:44 AM, Stephan Zednik <> wrote:

>> I don't understand how they validate. For instance, example 23: line-management example has no prefix, but no default prefix defined.
>> I now realise prov:ref="a" suffers from the same problem. This occurs in several examples.

> I do not at this time know why a QName with only a local part and no defined default namespace currently validates.

This is a perfectly valid qname, it's just the empty local namespace.


<ex:a xmlns:ex="">

is equivalent to

<a xmlns="">
  <b xmlns="">fred</b>

Here the two qnames expand to {}a and {}b

Now I don't know what that would mean in PROV-DM sense for the identifier.

The XML namespaces are not meant to be relative URIs, so it's not the
same as say <> in Turtle.

Received on Thursday, 28 February 2013 16:29:57 UTC