Re: Small @profile question

Hi Nathan,

I'm not quite sure what you are asking here.

Say we have document A that refers to profile P. The spec says that
both of these documents are RDFa and therefore could potentially
contain RDF graphs.

So are you asking whether A can be empty, or whether P could be empty?

As it happens, both could be empty...but I thought it worth finding
out which side of this you're pondering.

...actually re-reading your email I see a third possibility which is
probably what you mean. If A is processed without processing P, then
if every CURIE or term in A relied on a mapping in P then no graph
would be generated.

If that's what you mean, then yes, that is possible.

There have been discussions at times about adding triples to the
triple-store even if they have unmatched prefixes, allowing them to be
'fixed' at a later time; but we've never got very far with that.

Regards,

Mark

--
Mark Birbeck, webBackplane

mark.birbeck@webBackplane.com

http://webBackplane.com/mark-birbeck

webBackplane is a trading name of Backplane Ltd. (company number
05972288, registered office: 2nd Floor, 69/85 Tabernacle Street,
London, EC2A 4RR)




On Thu, Sep 9, 2010 at 7:48 PM, Nathan <nathan@webr3.org> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I just wanted to check my understanding was correct quickly.
>
> @profile allows me to author an RDFa document where the prefixes are stored
> in an external document pointed to by @profile.
>
> As in, author an RDFa document which when considered by itself, contains no
> RDF graph.
>
> is that correct?
>
> Best,
>
> Nathan
>
>

Received on Thursday, 9 September 2010 19:24:20 UTC