Re: Issue rdfms-rdf-names-use

Hmmm... I assumed (unwisely, perhaps) that was a typo in the spec.  (If the 
paragraph is taken in its entirety, that possibility seems more plausible.)

[[[
(P196) The formal namespace name for the properties and classes defined in
this specification is http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#.
When an RDF processor encounters an XML element or attribute name
that is declared to be from a namespace whose name begins with
the string "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax" and the
processor does not recognize the semantics of that name then the
processor is required to skip (i.e., generate no tuples for) the entire
XML element, including its content, whose name is unrecognized or that has 
an attribute whose name is unrecognized.
]]]

#g
--

At 09:59 PM 11/21/01 +0000, Dave Beckett wrote:
> >>>Brian McBride said:
> > I wasn't clear enough before.  Roland is relying on:
> >
> > 
> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-archive/2001Jun/att-0021/00-part#196
> >
> > [[[When an RDF processor encounters an XML element or attribute name that
> > is declared to be from a namespace whose name begins with the string
> > "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax" and the processor does not recognize
> > the semantics of that name then the processor is required to skip (i.e.,
> > generate no tuples for) the entire XML element, including its content,
> > whose name is unrecognized or that has an attribute whose name is
> > unrecognized.]]]
>
>He wasn't using that namespace in his example; his rdf:RDF header was:
>
>  <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
>           xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-schema-ns#"
>           xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.0/"
>           xmlns:dcq="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
>           xmlns:my="http://tunichts.org/">
>
>  .... much elided ...
>
>  <!-- now turn off RDF processing -->
>
>  <rdf:html><p><b>Notes</b></p></rdf:html> <!--@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ -->
>
>  ... more elided ...
>
>  </rdf:RDF>
>
>So rdf:html is NOT handled by para 196 and thus the above is not
>legal RDF/XML.  Any application that handle this is not conformant to
>the existing M&S.
>
>Note the namespace isn't the one for the syntax:
>   http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#
>but another one:
>   http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax
>or in fact, a whole set of namespaces with URIs beginning with that
>prefix - horrible!
>
>I guess this was done in the vein of how XML reserves all attributes
>starting with "xml", expecting new RDF terms to be put there, not for
>user applications to do it.
>
>However, I feel we shouldn't keep Para 196 around on the grounds of
>insufficient use and (correct) implementation.  This the first
>attempt at use I've ever seen and I don't remember seeing any parser
>that implemented this.
>
> > What he is doing is:
> >
> >    o writing an html document
> >    o embedding some RDF in it which does not get rendered by a
> >        browser
> >    o including in the middle of the RDF inside the html
> >
> >       <rdf:html> some html here </rdf:html>
> >
> >      which causes the browser to render the "some html here" and
> >      is ignored by the RDF parser.
> >
> > I bring this to the WG's attention because para 196 is relevant to this
> > issue, and also Roland's use of this is unusual.
>
>Para 196 doesn't apply.
>
>Dave

------------------------------------------------------------
Graham Klyne                    MIMEsweeper Group
Strategic Research              <http://www.mimesweeper.com>
<Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
       __
      /\ \
     /  \ \
    / /\ \ \
   / / /\ \ \
  / / /__\_\ \
/ / /________\
\/___________/

Received on Thursday, 22 November 2001 07:23:58 UTC