- From: Niklas Lindström <lindstream@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 15:14:51 +0100
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Cc: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>, Ben Adida <ben@adida.net>, RDFa <public-rdf-in-xhtml-tf@w3.org>
Ah, but indeed! Good elephant-hunting Mark! ;) It's quite comforting that RFC 3986 is so precise about these things. (I should have known that -- I now recall reading that very same rule a couple of months ago when investigating the legality of non-escaped colons in URI:s. Only remembered half of it apparently.) Best regards, Niklas 2009/11/16 Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>: > Pfew...:-) > > Ivan > > P.S. Mark-the-elephant-hunter:-) > > Mark Birbeck wrote: >> Hi Ivan/Niklas, >> >> 2009/11/16 Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>: >>> Hi Niklas, >>> >>> Niklas Lindström wrote: >>>>> So is there an elephant?:-) >>>> I haven't followed this discussion to closely, so I want to check if >>>> this the following is considered: >>>> >>>> This usage will "muddle the waters" in cases when the relative URI:s >>>> contain colon, and there is a prefix with the same name as the leading >>>> part before that, right? Concrete (but contrieved) example: >>>> >>>> Given: >>>> - base URI: <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/> >>>> - prefix Talk: <http://example.org/schema/talk#> >>>> >>>> When: >>>> @resource="Talk:Linked_Data" >>>> >>>> Then: >>>> - URI becomes < http://example.org/schema/talk#Linked_Data>, >>>> instead of <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Linked_Data>, which is >>>> might be expected? >>>> >>> Hm. You may found the elephant:-) >>> >>> Yes, in this case one would indeed get the example.org URI. >>> >>> The question is: is this use case so strong as to nullify the advantages >>> of using CURIE-s in @about? Indeed, wikipedia uses such URI-s with ':' >>> quite a lot but the user can of course put full URI-s into the value of >>> @about... >>> >>> Thanks! >> >> >> Whoah...slow down. :) >> >> "Talk:Linked_Data" is not a relative path! >> >> Forget prefixes, CURIEs, whatever...even if those things did not >> exist, how would a URI processor know whether "Talk:" is a scheme or >> just part of a relative path? >> >> RFC 3986 [1] addresses this in the following way: >> >> A path segment that contains a colon character (e.g., "this:that") >> cannot be used as the >> first segment of a relative-path reference, as it would be mistaken >> for a scheme name. >> Such a segment must be preceded by a dot-segment (e.g., >> "./this:that") to make a >> relative-path reference. >> >> So, if people are using relative paths that contain colons, in the >> wild, then there's a problem, and that problem is completely >> independent of RDFa. >> >> Regards, >> >> Mark >> >> [1] <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt> >> >> -- >> Mark Birbeck, webBackplane >> >> mark.birbeck@webBackplane.com >> >> http://webBackplane.com/mark-birbeck >> >> webBackplane is a trading name of Backplane Ltd. (company number >> 05972288, registered office: 2nd Floor, 69/85 Tabernacle Street, >> London, EC2A 4RR) > > -- > > Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead > Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > mobile: +31-641044153 > PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html > FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf > >
Received on Monday, 16 November 2009 14:15:45 UTC