- From: Graham Klyne <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
- Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 17:45:51 +0000
- To: "Jeremy Carroll" <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Cc: <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
OK, I withdraw my comment. #g -- At 04:31 PM 2/19/02 +0000, Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > > > Noting that rdf:ID is _not_ an XML ID-type attribute, can't we define > > rdf:ID not to be a same-document reference in the sense of RFC > > 2396? Then > > it can be defined as generating a URI relative to the current xml:base? > >We have already defined it to be rdf:about="# > >Even if we somehow managed to fix rdf:ID the problem of rdf:about="#frag" >would be with us. > >RFC 2396 is unfortunately clear that "#frag" is not an absolute URI or a >relative URI but a same document reference. The algorithm in section 5.2 is >equally clear, and feels inapplicable to me. > >Also the usage rdf:about="" is recommended by DAML, and this too is a same >document reference in RFC 2396, and treated as one by the recommended >algorithm. > > > >Jeremy ------------------------------------------------------------ Graham Klyne MIMEsweeper Group Strategic Research <http://www.mimesweeper.com> <Graham.Klyne@MIMEsweeper.com>
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2002 12:53:21 UTC