W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > October 2010

Re: ISSUE-46 (conversion of plain literals to IRIs): Should plain literals that match fully qualified IRIs be automatically converted to IRIs [RDFa 1.1 Core]

From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
Date: Fri, 08 Oct 2010 10:11:49 -0500
Message-ID: <4CAF34B5.8000702@aptest.com>
To: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
CC: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>, Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, RDFa Working Group WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
  I agree that these vocabularies have defined terms that are URIs.  But 
only opengraph has told people to use them in conjunction with RDFa in a 
way that is incorrect - right?

On 10/8/2010 5:14 AM, Toby Inkster wrote:
> On Thu, 7 Oct 2010 11:52:48 +0100
> Mark Birbeck<mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>  wrote:
>
>> My understanding of the use-case described was not 'hey
>> everyone...let's just make literals and URIs the same', but rather the
>> motivation was that authors wanting to use something like OGP might
>> accidently use @property/@content instead of @rel/@resource/@href.
> Authors using:
>
> 	<meta property="og:url" content="http://example.com/" />
>
> Are not doing so accidentally but intentionally. This is the correct
> use of the OGP vocab. OGP is certainly not the only place where URIs
> may appear as literals deliberately.
>
> See, for instance:
> 	<http://purl.org/NET/uri>
> 	<http://open.vocab.org/docs/canonicalUri>
>

-- 
Shane P. McCarron                          Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120
Managing Director                            Fax: +1 763 786-8180
ApTest Minnesota                            Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Friday, 8 October 2010 15:12:33 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 17:05:21 UTC