RDF-ISSUE-141 (fragment-identifiers-hellmann): Fragment Identifiers (Sebastian Hellmann) [RDF Concepts]

RDF-ISSUE-141 (fragment-identifiers-hellmann): Fragment Identifiers (Sebastian Hellmann) [RDF Concepts]


Raised by: Markus Lanthaler
On product: RDF Concepts

Hello all,
during my talk to Ivan (see other email) he pointed me to the changes made in the new working draft regarding the section Fragment Identifier.

Current recommendation: http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#section-fragID
New draft: http://www.w3.org/TR/2013/WD-rdf11-concepts-20130723/#section-fragID

Actually, I could live quite well with the old recommendation, but I have some questions regarding the new draft section.

Especially, I was looking at:

It 303 redirects to HTML anchor within a table row at http://www.w3.org/2009/08/skos-reference/skos.html#Collection:
      <th colspan="2"><a id="Collection" href="#Collection">skos:Collection</a> </th>
Q1: to what does #Collection actually refer to? The anchor element, the text in the element or the whole tree, i.e. the current element, the text and all subelements , ok it's not very deep here, but you know what I mean. There is a difference, between a single node in a tree, the attributes of this node, the content of this node and the subtree with the node at its head. 

the fragment chapter1 may identify a document section via the semantics of HTML's @name or @id attributes. The IRI <#chapter1> should then be taken to denote that same section in any RDFa-encoded triples within the same document. Similarly, if the @xml:id attribute [XML-ID] is used in an RDF/XML document, then the corresponding IRI should be taken to denote an XML element.

I am quite sure that the IRI http://www.w3.org/2004/02/skos/core#Collection  denotes more than the above mentioned anchor element. Is the sentence in the new working draft only relevant for RDFa+XTHML  ?

Q3: Does a fragment identifier in an application/rdf+xml or text/turtle  information resource refer to (1) the actual content in the file or (2) the IRI in the RDF Graph or (3) the external "thing" or all three of them? Looking at http://www.w3.org/TR/skos-reference/skos.rdf#Collection . Is this now something in line 53 <rdf:Description rdf:about="#Collection"> or "A collection of concepts"

Q4: Reading the old recommendation, use of fragment id for text/plain (RFC 5147) in the RDF based NLP Interchange Format[1] was consistent. With the new text I am not sure.

Is there anything wrong with this in RDF 1.1:

Case 1: 
curl -H "Accept: application/rdf+xml" "http://nlp2rdf.lod2.eu/nif-ws.php?informat=text&input=My+favourite+actress+is+Natalie+Portman#char=0,39"

(note that the URI http://nlp2rdf.lod2.eu/nif-ws.php?informat=text&input=My+favourite+actress+is+Natalie+Portman#char=0,39 denotes the Unicode character sequence  in the nif:isString property.) . 

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"

  <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://nlp2rdf.lod2.eu/nif-ws.php?informat=text&amp;input=My+favourite+actress+is+Natalie+Portman#char=0,39">
    <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://persistence.uni-leipzig.org/nlp2rdf/ontologies/nif-core#RFC5147String"/>
    <rdf:type rdf:resource="http://persistence.uni-leipzig.org/nlp2rdf/ontologies/nif-core#Context"/>
    <nif:isString>My favourite actress is Natalie Portman</nif:isString>


Case 2:
curl -H "Accept: text/plain" "http://nlp2rdf.lod2.eu/nif-ws.php?informat=text&input=My+favourite+actress+is+Natalie+Portman#char=0,39"
returns 39 characters: 
"My favourite actress is Natalie Portman"

Sorry, if this has been discussed before.
All the best,

[1] http://svn.aksw.org/papers/2013/ISWC_NIF/public.pdf

[ http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-rdf-comments/2013Aug/0051.html ]

Received on Saturday, 24 August 2013 15:21:05 UTC