Re: rdf-text telecon agenda

From: Sandro Hawke <sandro@w3.org>
Subject: Re: rdf-text telecon agenda 
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 08:53:10 -0500

> 
>> >> My last preference would be to make statements where complete
>> >> compliance would require all RDF applications to change. =A0This is
>> >> what the current document says.
>> 
>> > What in the current document makes this the case?
>> 
>> Any language that says a particular previously-legal construct MUST
>> NOT appear in RDF graphs is making a demand of *all* RDF applications.
>> The precise wording is
>> 
>> 
>> 	typed rdf:text literals MUST NOT occur explicitly in published
>> 	RDF content ...
> 
> Ah.  So you think this text implies that all RDF authoring software must
> stop users from making graphs like this?  I only understood it to be
> saying authors must not do it, and software must not do it on its own
> accord.  And since no software would do that.... no change is required.

To me, "MUST NOT" MUST mean "MUST NOT UNDER ANY CIRCUMSTANCES".

> I also believe that use of the RDF namespace (like all other w3.org
> namespaces) is reserved for W3C, but I understand you might disagree
> about that.

I think that this stance goes directly counter to the principles of RDF.

In fact the only wording in the RDF document set on the use of
identifiers in the "RDF namespace" that I could fine is only for the RDF/XML
syntax and occurs in RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised)
http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-syntax-grammar-20040210/

*************************
The RDF namespace URI reference (or namespace name) is
http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns# and is typically used in XML
with the prefix rdf although other prefix strings may be used. The RDF
Vocabulary is identified by this namespace name and consists of the
following names only: 

...

Any other names are not defined and SHOULD generate a warning when
encountered, but should otherwise behave normally. 
***************************

>      -- Sandro

peter

Received on Wednesday, 27 May 2009 14:03:12 UTC