- From: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
- Date: Thu, 14 Feb 2002 13:20:15 -0600
- To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- CC: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
I notice that Brian seems ready to close all the little naggling issues. I think this is great but I don't want to see some issues drop thru the cracks. Particularly, I'm worried about the URI-vs-URIviews issue, which I thought we agreed to put on the issues list, but I don't seem to see it. Specifically in: > 16: Issue rdfms-fragments > > Propose: > > o The WG resolves that the meaning of absolute > URI's with fragment ID's is a matter of web architecture and > beyond the scope of this WG and that this issue be closed. > > > See: > http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#rdfms-fragments I really can't agree with this. It's our problem that RDF uses this non-standard piece of Web architecture, and in doing so has incurred all sorts of problems. If we're going to be the Resource Description Framework, we need we're actually describing resources. My ideal resolution would look like: o The WG resolves that the use of absolute URIs with fragment IDs is a to identify Web resources is relatively incompatible with current Web architecture. o We recommend that RDF users refrain from using '#' in their Resource identifiers and namespaces. RDF developers and tool creators may present a warning to the user when using resource identifiers with '#' in them. o We understand the need to identify portions of Web entities (data used to describe a resource, such as the data returned when making an HTTP GET request). We recommend that they identify such Resources using something along the lines of: _:x rdf:type web:Fragment . _:x web:resource <http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist> . _:x web:fragID "w3cMediaType-1" . _:x dc:date "2002-02-14T13:03Z" . My goal is to: a) raise awareness about the problem while b) maintaining backwards-compatibility but c) lay the ground work for future WGs to fix this bug [...later...] > (d) choose namespace names that end in non-xml-name-characters > such as / # ? I think perhaps we should provide some warning about using # in namespace names, dependent on the resolution of rdfms-fragments. you're-not-getting-off-that-easy-'ly yrs, -- [ "Aaron Swartz" ; <mailto:me@aaronsw.com> ; <http://www.aaronsw.com/> ]
Received on Thursday, 14 February 2002 14:20:20 UTC