- From: Dan Brickley <danbri@google.com>
- Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2015 20:32:16 +0000
- To: Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net>
- Cc: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>, W3C Web Schemas Task Force <public-vocabs@w3.org>
On 19 February 2015 at 20:25, Gregg Kellogg <gregg@greggkellogg.net> wrote: > As Kingsley points out, though <http://schema.org> and <http://schema.org/> are two different resources in the strict RDF sense. RDF does not make a unique names assumption; different URIs can be names for the same real world entity. Per http://www.w3.org/TR/2014/REC-rdf11-concepts-20140225/#resources-and-statements "Any IRI or literal denotes something in the world (the "universe of discourse"). These things are called resources. Anything can be a resource, including physical things, documents, abstract concepts, numbers and strings; the term is synonymous with "entity" as it is used in the RDF Semantics specification". When we introduced the WebSite type for schema.org I considered exploiting this very slim distinction between <http://example.com> and <http://example.com/> (the former being a WebSite, the latter being a different entity, its home page, a WebPage). But the distinction is too slippery and undeployable in practice for a number of reasons. All this nitpicking aside I do see value in nudging schema.org examples towards using http://schema.org/ with the trailing slash, for consistency with the RDFa vocab declaration. Dan
Received on Thursday, 19 February 2015 20:32:44 UTC