- 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