- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 06 Dec 2001 17:44:12 -0600
- To: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- CC: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
Aaron Swartz wrote: > > Here is a simple resolution to the rdfms-fragments issue. Define that as > URI-refs are turned back into full URIs (thru the base URI), if a '#' exists > it is encoded as %23. and if %23 already occurs in the URI reference, then what? Why in the world would you want to do anything like that, anyway? I don't understand what you're trying to achieve. I re-read the entry in the issues list http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-fragments It seems to say that folks are confused; that doesn't necessarily mean the spec is broken. ;-) The model theory (http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-mt/) gives a perfectly good semantics for all relative URI references. It treats them all the same, whether they have #'s in them or not. It depends in no way on the MIME spec, the HTTP spec, etc. RDF doesn't give a flip what these identifiers denote; it just tells you that whatever they denote, you can always deduce A from (and A B) and you can deduce (exists (?x) (P ?x)) from (P a). [RDFS gives you a few more such rules]. Can you point out which part of whatever spec bugs you? Or give a use case that you think is insufficiently specified? (i.e. not a foo/bar/baz example) Or some piece of code that's acting funny, or difficult to write or interoperate with? > So: > > [...] > <rdf:Description rdf:about="http://rdf.example.org/foo#bar"> > <rdf:value>baz</rdf:value> > </rdf:Description> > [...] > > Would represent this N-Triple: > > <http://rdf.example.org/foo%23bar> > <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns%23value> "baz" . > > Cheers, > > -- > [ "Aaron Swartz" ; <mailto:me@aaronsw.com> ; <http://www.aaronsw.com/> ] -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 6 December 2001 18:44:17 UTC