- From: Andy Seaborne <andy.seaborne@epimorphics.com>
- Date: Wed, 23 Nov 2011 12:40:14 +0000
- To: public-rdf-wg@w3.org
On 23/11/11 01:20, Gavin Carothers wrote: >>> My suggestion is not expanding the range of characters that are, or are not, allowed in a prefix name but I'm open to adding %xx. >> > >> > This would make a second example work, while the four others still don't. >> > >> > As long as most IRIs can't be usefully abbreviated with prefixed names, it's a fundamental mistake to think of prefixed names as an all-purpose IRI abbreviation mechanism. It just isn't. It's a feature for abbreviating IRIs that have been designed with the feature in mind. (I may be refuting a point here that you didn't make but others did when asking for the same feature.) > Prefixed names are a all-purpose IRI abbreviation mechanism in RDFa. > Which thanks to FaceBook Open Graph has far more deployed data then > SPARQL does. > Just on the FaceBook Open Graph point: Of og:audio\u003Atitle and <http://ogp.me/ns#audio:title> I find the <> form quite adequate and even preferable -- it happens to be that the NS is short so the URI is not too long. Some people might quite like: @prefix og-audio <http://ogp.me/ns#audio:> . og-audio:title because, often, you don't get a huge number of prefix declarations (sometimes you do). Unfortunately, you can't write: <audio:title> Andy
Received on Wednesday, 23 November 2011 12:40:54 UTC