- From: Miles, AJ \(Alistair\) <A.J.Miles@rl.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 20 Jan 2006 18:45:43 -0000
- To: <public-swbp-wg@w3.org>
- Cc: <semantic-web@w3.org>
Just putting this on the record ... I've just discovered a technical detail wrt xml:base attribute in RDF/XML docs - if you put a hash at the end of the base URI it is ignored when constructing relative URIs. I.e. the following RDF/XML: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <rdf:RDF xml:base="http://example.com/foo#" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"> <rdf:Description rdf:about=""> <rdfs:label>this</rdfs:label> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF> ... gives the following triple: <http://example.com/foo> rdfs:label "this". It doesn't matter if you put more than one hash at the end of the base URI, they are all ignored. I.e. the following RDF/XML: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <rdf:RDF xml:base="http://example.com/foo####" xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"> <rdf:Description rdf:about=""> <rdfs:label>this</rdfs:label> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF> ... gives the same triple as above: <http://example.com/foo> rdfs:label "this". Note however that the absolute URI <http://example.com/spong> is treated by RDF parsers as different from the absolute URI <http://example.com/spong#> (which spec can verify that this?). I.e. the following RDF/XML: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"> <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.com/spong#"> <rdfs:label>spong#</rdfs:label> </rdf:Description> <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://example.com/spong"> <rdfs:label>spong</rdfs:label> </rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF> ... gives the following triples: <http://example.com/spong#> rdfs:label "spong#". <http://example.com/spong> rdfs:label "spong". Interestingly, the URI <http://example.com/spong##> raises an error when using the W3C RDF validation service (running ARP) - Error: {W107} Bad URI <http://elsewhere.org/spong##>: Fragment contains invalid character:# However, Sesame 1.2.3 doesn't raise an error, and creates a new URI resource in the graph. I remember vaguely Jeremy Carroll saying that hashes are actually allowed in fragment ids ... is this right or wrong? Finally, this has implications for RDFS/OWL vocabularies/ontologies that use a hash namespace, because it means we have to be careful not to confuse the 'vocabulary URI' (a.k.a. the 'ontology URI', i.e. the URI that identifies the vocabulary/ontology) and the 'namespace URI' (i.e. the actual URI you append the local name of each term to). E.g. http://example.com/vocab - vocabulary URI. http://example.com/vocab# - namespace URI. For RDFS/OWL vocabularies/ontologies that use a slash namespace both the vocabulary URI and the namespace URI are the same, e.g. http://example.com/anothervocab/ - vocabulary URI. http://example.com/anothervocab/ - namespace URI. Cheers, Al. --- Alistair Miles Research Associate CCLRC - Rutherford Appleton Laboratory Building R1 Room 1.60 Fermi Avenue Chilton Didcot Oxfordshire OX11 0QX United Kingdom Email: a.j.miles@rl.ac.uk Tel: +44 (0)1235 445440
Received on Friday, 20 January 2006 18:58:03 UTC