W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org > February 2008

Re: A note on CURIE-s in tutorials, primers, examples...

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2008 14:31:36 -0600
Message-ID: <47C5C8A8.2010601@aptest.com>
To: Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>
CC: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, W3C RDFa task force <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>

We absolutely should not reopen this issue - in fact there is no issue 
to open that I know of.  I was just hoping someone could point me at a 
use case, and you did.  Thanks!

Ben Adida wrote:
> Ivan Herman wrote:
>> Why is there a difference between @rel/@rev and @resource/@about in 
>> this respect? After all, we could argue that we could put a full URI 
>> into the @rel/@rev value, too... In all cases the value of CURIE-s is 
>> that I do not have to type in a full, long, and possibly complicated 
>> URI... (which I have to do all the time in RDF/XML, and it is quite a 
>> pain...)
> See my previous post on needing bnode referencing in @resource.
> That doesn't apply to @rel/@rev, which are only predicates, and we've 
> resolved that, to keep the initial cases of RDFa simple, we didn't 
> want safe CURIEs in @rel/@rev....
> Now, putting on my chair hat....
> There will always be ways of pointing out slight inconsistencies in 
> what we do, because we're working with a host language we don't 
> control. The approach we seem to have implicitly agreed upon is to 
> keep existing attributes simple (CURIE *or* URI, not both), add more 
> features in the new attributes (safe CURIEs in @about and @resource), 
> and ensure some reasonable consistency (@property same as @rel). I 
> think that was the group's compromise, and I'm not seeing any reason 
> to re-open this discussion in last call, unless there's a specific use 
> case that's really a problem.
> -Ben

Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Wednesday, 27 February 2008 20:31:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:01:55 UTC