- From: Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>
- Date: Thu, 20 Sep 2001 08:58:59 -0500
- To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- CC: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
Dave Beckett wrote: > > >>>Jeremy Carroll said: > > <snip/> > > I also note that this is consistent with our test case: > > > > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-difference-between-ID-and-about/test2.nt > > > > http://www.w3.org/2000/10/rdf-tests/rdfcore/rdfms-difference-between-ID-and-about/test2.rdf > > > > which has not been approved, seems to suggest the following > > > > 1: ID's are subject to the same URI encoding rule. > > Note that at present, RDF ID attributes are not XML IDs. I don't understand how that's relevant. We decided that rdf:ID="foo" is short for rdf:about="#foo" and hence rdf:ID *is* subject to the same rules for turning Unicode strings into URI references. > RDF M&S > uses a production from XML's original syntax, but does not say that > the IDs have the same meaning as XML. There are also some words I > think about ID creating a resource in M&S - which I think has been > discussed previously (can't find them just now). > > I noted this as an issue near > http://www.w3.org/TR/2001/WD-rdf-syntax-grammar-20010906/#rdf-id > > > 2: N-triple URIs are in US-ASCII and must be already encoded. > > The encoding of URIs in N-Triples must change to match the Charmod > requirements, No... to do that would be to propagate a misunderstanding. n-triples has the distinctive feature that URI references go right in the file without any sort of quoting or other mangling, except putting <>'s around them. (relative URI references do get absolutized.) Recall: URI references consist of US-ASCII characters only. No URI reference has an umlaut in it. string literals in n-triples need quoting, but URI references do not. So n-triples shows the *result* of taking a unicode string from an rdf:resource attribute and converting it to a URI reference. > see the discussion on www-rdf-comments starting at > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2001JulSep/0245.html > and subsequent responses by me. I see: |Looking; CHARMOD says, for URIs: | | A W3C specification that defines new syntax for URIs, such as a new | kind of fragment identifier, MUST specify that characters outside | the US-ASCII repertoire are encoded in URIs using UTF-8 and | %HH-escaping | -- http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod/#sec-URIs -- DaveB, Tue, 18 Sep 2001 10:38:59 +0100 That text from the CHARMOD spec is perhaps misleading: no W3C specification can define new syntax for URIs. That's what RFC2396 is for. W3C specs can be defined that *use* URIs. n-triples is such a format. Luckily, as I say, URIs in n-triples don't need any form of quoting. -- Dan Connolly, W3C http://www.w3.org/People/Connolly/
Received on Thursday, 20 September 2001 10:00:09 UTC