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]

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!

Best,

Nathan

>>>> ISSUE-84

Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2011 10:20:49 UTC