Re: Future Proofing of "rdf:type" Considering HTTP and HTTPS

Hello Melvin,

I wonder why you ask this question only for rdf:type, and not for the
entire RDF schema.

As a possible/partial answer, I believe that the W3C officially regards
HTTP and HTTPS URIs as equivalent, at least that is what this blog post
<https://www.w3.org/blog/2016/05/https-and-the-semantic-weblinked-data/> says
(the RDF namespace http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns# is part of
http://www.w3.org/). So there would be no need to change the HTTP URI to a
HTTPS URI.

Regards,
Frans

Op ma 17 apr 2023 om 15:25 schreef Melvin Carvalho <melvincarvalho@gmail.com
>:

> As you are well aware, the "rdf:type" property is part of RDF Schema,
> helping us specify the class or category to which a particular resource
> belongs. The current URI for "rdf:type" is based on the HTTP protocol, but
> as the web continues to evolve, many websites and schemas are transitioning
> to HTTPS for increased security.
>
> For instance, I recall that Schema.org made the switch from HTTP to HTTPS
> a while ago. This made me wonder about the future-proofing of "rdf:type"
> and its continued relevance in the face of potential protocol upgrades.
>
> Specifically, I have the following questions:
>
>    1. How future-proofed is "rdf:type" given its dependency on the HTTP
>    URI?
>    2. What would be the potential implications if the "rdf:type" property
>    were to change from HTTP to HTTPS?
>    3. Are there any possible steps that can be taken to mitigate this
>    change when working with the semantic web today.
>
> thoughts and guidance on this issue will be greatly appreciated.
>
>
>