- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Mon, 09 Aug 2010 08:50:13 -0500
- To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@kellogg-assoc.com>
- CC: RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <4C600795.7010501@aptest.com>
Nice catch Gregg. However, I don't think your proposed wording is quite right either. I think with this datatype any string that starts xyz:, where xyz is not a defined prefix mapping, automatically falls through to being evaluated as an AbsURI. and since an AbsURI can essentially be anything... it always gets treated that way. I need to think about this a little more, but... On 8/8/2010 12:15 PM, Gregg Kellogg wrote: > It seems that a when evaluating a TermOrCurieOrAbsURI, a warning will > always be generated for a URI. > > Section 7.6 Processor Status says "A WARNING /must/ be generated when > a CURIE prefix fails to be resolved", however Section 7.4 CURIE and > URI Processing indicates that an attempt to evaluate the value as a > CURIE must be made before determining if it is an absolute URI. Note > that "http:" appears to be a missing prefix mapping, but is necessary > to be considered to be a URI. > > Perhaps section 7.6 should change to read "A WARNING /must/ be > generated when a CURIE prefix fails to be resolved and the value is > not a valid URI". > > Gregg > -- Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Monday, 9 August 2010 13:50:49 UTC