- From: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 10:53:28 -0500
- To: Richard Cyganiak <richard@cyganiak.de>
- Cc: RDF Working Group WG <public-rdf-wg@w3.org>
I like both of these... Ivan On Nov 6, 2012, at 05:58 , Richard Cyganiak wrote: > Some additions/clarifications in informative text in the Concepts ED based on various comments received over the last weeks: > > [[ > Perhaps the most important characterisitic of IRIs in web architecture is that they can be dereferenced, and hence serve as starting points for interactions with a remote server. This specification, however, is not concerned with such interactions. It does not define an interaction model. It only treats IRIs as globally unique identifiers in a graph data model that describes resources. > ]] > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html#referents > > [[ > Some concrete RDF syntaxes permit relative IRIs as a convenient shorthand that allows authoring of documents independently from their final publishing location. Relative IRIs must be resolved against a base IRI to make them absolute. Therefore, the RDF graph serialized in such syntaxes is well-defined only if a base IRI can be established [RFC3986]. > ]] > http://dvcs.w3.org/hg/rdf/raw-file/default/rdf-concepts/index.html#dfn-relative-iri > > Best, > Richard ---- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ mobile: +31-641044153 FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Tuesday, 6 November 2012 15:53:53 UTC