- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Fri, 20 Apr 2001 15:01:25 +0100
- To: rdf core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
My thoughts on this issue are based on my recent work making and RDF/XML parser. I started with working out what the M&S and RDFS documents said about which bits of syntax can be attributes and ended up with this reference: http://www.redland.opensource.ac.uk/notes/concepts.html So what could be in this prefix confusion area are: 'syntax only things' rdf:about / about rdf:aboutEach / aboutEach rdf:aboutEachPrefix / aboutEachPrefix rdf:ID / ID rdf:bagID / bagID rdf:resource / resource rdf:parseType / parseType plus the defined RDF M&S properties: rdf:object rdf:predicate rdf:subject rdf:type rdf:value rdf:li rdf:_n / _n [Using the RDF-like words RECOMMEND, ALLOW, REQUIRE here] I propose we RECOMMEND the use of a namespace prefix for all attributes but ALLOW the first set of 'syntax only' attributes to appear unprefixed, when the element is in the rdf M&S namespace, for compatibility with deployed RDF/XML. For example these would be allowed: <rdf:Description xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" about="http://example.org/"> ... <Description xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" about="http://example.org/"> ... But this would not be allowed: <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:foo="http://example.org/foo"> <foo:bar about="http://example.org"/> ... </foo:bar> </rdf:RDF> since the foo:bar element doesn't have the RDF namespace URI. I'm not sure about whether the second list of RDF properties should be allowed without prefixes. I can see several alternatives: 1. RECOMMEND prefix, ALLOW without as above 2. Ditto but just for rdf:li and rdf:_n which are most common 3. REQUIRE prefix I propose all RDFS schema properties are REQUIRED to have a namespace prefix. Dave
Received on Friday, 20 April 2001 10:01:28 UTC