- 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