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

Re: Re 2: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-37: Clarifying bnode explanation

From: Toby Inkster <tai@g5n.co.uk>
Date: Tue, 19 Oct 2010 21:38:53 +0100
To: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@webbackplane.com>
Cc: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>, Manu Sporny <msporny@digitalbazaar.com>, RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20101019213853.7633d57c@miranda.g5n.co.uk>
How about:

After processing, the following triples will be generated:

  _:john foaf:mbox <mailto:john@example.org> .
  _:sue foaf:mbox <mailto:sue@example.org> .
  _:john foaf:knows _:sue .

The blank node identifiers ("_:john" and "_:sue") are arbitrary and
implementations are not required to maintain the same identifiers as
occur in the RDFa markup. The above data could have equivalently been
represented as:

  _:a foaf:mbox <mailto:john@example.org> .
  _:b foaf:mbox <mailto:sue@example.org> .
  _:a foaf:knows _:b .

For clarity, this document retains blank node identifiers in examples,
but developers must not rely on RDFa implementations returning
identifiers that are consistent with the RDFa markup.

Toby A Inkster
Received on Tuesday, 19 October 2010 20:39:35 UTC

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