- From: (unknown charset) Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
- Date: Fri, 11 Jun 2004 15:14:58 -0400
- To: (unknown charset) Rob McCool <robm@robm.com>
- Cc: (unknown charset) Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>, public-rdf-tap@w3.org
Hi Rob, (glad to see things happening on this list again :) * Rob McCool <robm@robm.com> [2004-06-11 11:49-0700] > > > The data at http://tap.stanford.edu/tap.rdf is all like this: > > > > <rdf:Description rdf:about="EarDrops"> > > <rdf:type>ProductType</rdf:type> > > <rdfs:subClassOf>EarCareProduct</rdfs:subClassOf> > > </rdf:Description> > > > > when I assume you mean something like > > > > <rdf:Description rdf:about="EarDrops"> > > <rdf:type rdf:resource="&tap;ProductType" /> > > <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="&tap;EarCareProduct" /> > > </rdf:Description> > > > > Let me know if it gets fixed. > > Yes, this was fixed a while ago but the downloads weren't updated. That > entry now looks like this: > > <tap:ProductType rdf:ID="http://tap.stanford.edu/data/EarDrops"> I believe this should be rdf:about not rdf:ID. The latter gets expanded in context of base URI, but shouldn't itself contain characters beyond XML NCName. So you could either write rdf:ID="EarDrops" assuming a base URI context of http://tap.stanford.edu/data/ or else write rdf:about="http://tap.stanford.edu/data/EarDrops". Spec nerd detail: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/#section-Syntax-ID-xml-base http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-syntax-grammar/#rdf-id "An attribute ·string-value· matching any legal [XML-NS] token NCName". -> http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-xml-names/#NT-NCName NCName ::= (Letter '_') (NCNameChar)* NCNameChar ::=Letter |Digit '.' '-' |'_' |CombiningChar Extender > <rdfs:subClassOf rdf:resource="http://tap.stanford.edu/data/EarCareProduct"/> > </tap:ProductType> > > If you want to download an updated tap.rdf, go here: > > http://panic.stanford.edu/tap-all.rdf.gz Cool. I'd like to recommend TAP as one of the 'bulk' namespaces that could be used inside FOAF files, eg. for describing weblog post topics, personal interests, stuff being sold etc. Is http://tap.stanford.edu/data/ the offial-est namespace URI you folks are deploying? Should it be OK to encourage folk to write RDF using this namespace and expect it to be dereference-able over the coming years...? cheers, Dan
Received on Friday, 11 June 2004 15:15:00 UTC