- From: Shane McCarron <shane@aptest.com>
- Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 11:46:40 -0500
- To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
- CC: W3C RDFa WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Honestly, it almost never changes. But it's not like there is an RSS feed that would tell you. Regardless, I think it is outside of our scope AND A BAD IDEA to try to define interesting sets of schemes so you can identify that something is a URI or not within the context of a plain literal. Its just a bad idea. The real issue here is that some organizations in the wild are treating plan literals as a rdf:resource when, in fact, they are really just a string. This is angels on the head of a pin stuff, and no one outside of the semantic web activity is going to care. Nobody. Someone with an RDF hat needs to tell these organizations that a string is not a resource, and explain it in very small words peppered with sexy terms like 'knowledge engine'. What you can't do is say 'a string is not a URI in the same way that a number is not a Numeral'. No one outside of a 4th grade math class or a PhD program is going to grok it. The right thing to do is to get them to use <link rel='whatever' href='URI'> instead of <meta>. @href, @src, and @resource take URIs and that's what they should be doing. It isn't any more work for their consumer base to do this instead of using meta. Every uses link for stylesheets and other stuff already. Its fine. Its safe. On 9/30/2010 11:41 AM, Ivan Herman wrote: > On Sep 30, 2010, at 17:33 , Shane McCarron wrote: > >> Right - but I thought the root RFC would be interesting in light of the discussion. That list can change AT ANY TIME. If we decided to try to make rules that were dependent on knowing that list, a conforming processor would need to read that list from time to time. > > True. And, an installation would have to read the content of the file (via crontab or something similar) say, once a day. Which is an extra pain on an implementation:-( > > Having said that: do we have an idea how often these things change? Or is there some sort of a notification service by IETF for something like that? > > Sigh... > > Ivan > >> On 9/30/2010 10:28 AM, Ivan Herman wrote: >>> Actually, the list of registered URI schemes is at >>> >>> http://www.iana.org/assignments/uri-schemes.html >>> >>> Ivan >>> >>> On Sep 30, 2010, at 17:19 , Ivan Herman wrote: >>> >>>> ... are at: >>>> >>>> http://www.w3.org/2010/02/rdfa/meetings/2010-09-30 >>>> >>>> Note that we had two issue resolutions, but several people were missing. I think that we should consider those resolutions accepted and the issues closed unless there is an objection within 48 hours. >>>> >>>> There was also a discussion on the literal->uri issue. We agreed we would _not_ close the issue, but the discussion is ongoing... >>>> >>>> Ivan >>>> >>>> >>>> ---- >>>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead >>>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >>>> mobile: +31-641044153 >>>> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html >>>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> ---- >>> Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead >>> Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ >>> mobile: +31-641044153 >>> PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html >>> FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> -- >> Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 >> Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 >> ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com >> >> > > ---- > Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead > Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ > mobile: +31-641044153 > PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html > FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf > > > > > -- Shane P. McCarron Phone: +1 763 786-8160 x120 Managing Director Fax: +1 763 786-8180 ApTest Minnesota Inet: shane@aptest.com
Received on Thursday, 30 September 2010 16:47:43 UTC