Re: PROPOSAL to close ISSUE-61: Does the RDFa API need a vocabulary helper

Ivan Herman wrote:
>> That said, in a previous revision of the api, there was another (disputed iirc) approach, which was to change the return type of Profile::setPrefix from void to a "PrefixResolver", so you'd:
>>  foaf = rdf.setPrefix('foaf', '');
>> then you could do:
>>  foaf('name')
>>  rdf.resolve('foaf:name')
>>  rdf.prefixes.foaf + name
>>  ...
> This is actually very close to what I am used to, which is
> foaf = Namespace('')

indeed, it's a combination of both approaches :)

> although, for my instinct, the first argument ('foaf') is actually superfluous. But I can live with that...

The first argument enables the rdf.resolve('foaf:name') and 
rdf.prefixes.foaf functionality to still be used, giving users a choice 
in how they prefer to resolve URIs - if the dictionary prefixes.foaf and 
curie resolve() methods were removed from the API all together though, 
then yes it would be superfluous.



Received on Thursday, 13 January 2011 10:13:16 UTC