W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdf-wg@w3.org > March 2011

Other issues?

From: Mischa Tuffield <mischa.tuffield@garlik.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 17:37:02 +0000
Message-Id: <08D85D45-82A3-4512-B44F-0ADE874CAE05@garlik.com>
To: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
Hi All, 

A couple of questions for the group:

1) I wonder if there is a place already on the wiki for capturing "other issues", the miscellaneous ones basically? For example, the URIRef vs IRI issue. 

2) And whether or not the RDFa spec[1] is in or out of scope of this working group, as it is not listed in the charter as one of the documents which the group will be looking to update[1]? The reason I mention this is again, if we end up in a world where both SPARQL and RDF (lets say the Turtle serialisation) are using IRIs, developers would have to use a different URI encoding library for SPARQL & Turtle, from the one they would be using if there were to be serialising to RDFa. 

Regards, 

Mischa *goes off to look into the back-compatibility of URIRefs to IRIs (any pointers existing work comparing the definitions would be much appreciated)

[1] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/
[2] http://www.w3.org/2011/01/rdf-wg-charter#deliverables 
[3] http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#T_URI_reference 

___________________________________
Mischa Tuffield PhD
Email: mischa.tuffield@garlik.com
Homepage - http://mmt.me.uk/
Garlik Limited, 1-3 Halford Road, Richmond, TW10 6AW
+44(0)845 652 2824  http://www.garlik.com/
Registered in England and Wales 535 7233 VAT # 849 0517 11
Registered office: Thames House, Portsmouth Road, Esher, Surrey, KT10 9AD


Received on Wednesday, 9 March 2011 17:37:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:04:03 UTC