- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com>
- Date: Tue, 12 Jun 2001 13:06:51 +0100
- To: Art Barstow <barstow@w3.org>
- Cc: RDFCore Working Group <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 08:19 AM 6/6/01 -0400, Art Barstow wrote:
> > >
> > > Someone, I think it might have been Graham, suggested recently that
> > > attributes in the xml namespace should not generate properties.
> > >
> > > Any thoughts?
> >
> > This looks like it might be a good idea; it occurred to me too and I
> > remember someone mentioning it, but couldn't find the message when I
> > went looking for it.
>
>Why would it be a good idea to not generate triples
>for these attributes? It seems like the language should
>have as few execeptions as possible.
I don't remember making the comment, but I can reconstruct some possible
rationale...
Attributes (and elements) beginning with xml are already special cases in
XML. xml:base and xmlns spring to mind.
By being clear that attributes beginning with xml do not generate triples,
we avoid the situation that future developments of XML might change the
output generated for some given document:
<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf=... ...>
<rdf:Description rdf:about='#foo' xml:fudge='...' />
</rdf:RDF>
Absent an interpretation for xml:fudge, it would appear as an RDF attribute
of the RDF resource #foo. A subsequent definition of xml:fudge to affect
XML infoset generation could change that.
#g
------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne Baltimore Technologies
Strategic Research Content Security Group
<Graham.Klyne@Baltimore.com> <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<http://www.baltimore.com>
------------------------------------------------------------
Received on Tuesday, 12 June 2001 10:25:25 UTC