W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-rdfa-wg@w3.org > February 2011

Re: ISSUE-84 (Cool URIs and HTTPRange-14): The W3C TAG has asked us to mention that the use of fragment identifiers can be problematic [LC Comment - RDFa Core 1.1]

From: Nathan <nathan@webr3.org>
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 2011 10:18:57 +0000
Message-ID: <4D511891.9050904@webr3.org>
To: Ivan Herman <ivan@w3.org>
CC: RDFa Working Group WG <public-rdfa-wg@w3.org>
Ivan Herman wrote:
> There may be one more additional feature we may want to add to the text, beyond what the TAG might give us: avoid using fragid-s in profile URI-s. That is the only URI that an RDFa processor will dereference, and two different URI-s differing by a fragid only will return the same graph. On the other hand, using two different URI-s for the same graph my make the local caching process inefficient (unless clients would strip the fragid part before caching but I would not expect them to do that...)

Hmm, should we be clarifying the definition of @profile to accept a 
whitespace separated list of absolute-URIs (never relative, never with 
fragment) to avoid /some/ unexpected behaviour?

* I say some, because people could still use "mailto:bob@example.org", 
but I figure we shouldn't cater for people who like to do things like that!



>>>> ISSUE-84
Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2011 10:20:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 21:19:51 UTC