Re: RDF URI References

Le 04/11/2010 14:54, Nathan a écrit :
> Damian Steer wrote:
>> On 04/11/10 13:29, Nathan wrote:
>>> Hi All,
>>
>>> However, the definition of an "RDF URI Reference" is:
>>>
>>> "an absolute URI with optional fragment identifier"
>>
>> That's not the definition, and you've missed a significant of that
>> sentence:
>>
>> "A URI reference within an RDF graph (an RDF URI reference) is a
>> Unicode string [UNICODE] that:
>>
>> * does not contain any control characters ( #x00 - #x1F, #x7F-#x9F)
>> * and would produce a valid URI character sequence (per RFC2396 [URI],
>> sections 2.1) representing an absolute URI with optional fragment
>> identifier when subjected to the encoding described below."
>>
>> Note that "...representing an absolute URI with optional fragment
>> identifier * when subjected to the encoding described below *". URIRef
>> allows characters that URI doesn't.
>>
>> The explanation:
>>
>> "Note: this section anticipates an RFC on Internationalized Resource
>> Identifiers. Implementations may issue warnings concerning the use of
>> RDF URI References that do not conform with [IRI draft] or its
>> successors."
>>
>> i.e. "we wanted to use IRI, but it hadn't finished".
>
> Makes sense, so, many recent docs, formal and informal, mention
> explicitly "URI Reference" rather than "RDF URI Reference", "URI" or
> "IRI" - for future docs which term should be used?

I guess IRI should be the best choice. BTW, the OWL 2 specifications 
exclusively rely on IRIs in place where OWL 1 was using URIs and URI 
references.

>
> Best,
>
> Nathan
>


-- 
Antoine Zimmermann
Researcher at:
Laboratoire d'InfoRmatique en Image et Systèmes d'information
Database Group
7 Avenue Jean Capelle
69621 Villeurbanne Cedex
France
Lecturer at:
Institut National des Sciences Appliquées de Lyon
20 Avenue Albert Einstein
69621 Villeurbanne Cedex
France
antoine.zimmermann@insa-lyon.fr
http://zimmer.aprilfoolsreview.com/

Received on Thursday, 4 November 2010 14:01:31 UTC