- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2002 10:13:07 +0100
- To: "R.V.Guha" <guha@guha.com>, <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
> (2) We use normal http uris and embed this somewhere in the middle of > the uri. eg., http://www.w3.org/reserved/cwm#implies or > http://www.w3.org/reserved/http://oasis.org/cwm#implies. At the telecon on Friday this was the preferred option, or rather using a special prefix. e.g. http://myuri maps to http://www.w3.org/reserved/http://myuri There was discussion that this does not involve a central registry because the whole of URI space can be embedded under http://www.w3.org/reserved/ (I made comments about Hilbert's hotel). Other made comments which I may describe as Hilbert's web-server. We put a smart on the W3C webserver such that http://www.w3.org/reserved/SOME-URI has a redirect to SOME-URI. This would then give an operational semantics to embedding the whole of the light web within the dark web. I wished to point out a bug with this redirect. Consider an RDF resource like http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label and its dark variant http://www.w3.org/reserved/http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#label getting either of these documents and applying the usual rules will result in getting <rdf:Property ID="label"> <rdf:type resource="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#Property"/> <rdfs:label xml:lang="en">label</rdfs:label> <rdfs:label xml:lang="fr">label</rdfs:label> <rdfs:domain rdf:resource="#Resource"/> <rdfs:comment>Provides a human-readable version of a resource name.</rdfs:comment> <rdfs:range rdf:resource="#Literal"/> </rdf:Property> as the definition of either resource. In the first case (the light case, intended by the document author), the base is http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema In the second case (the dark case, not intended by the author) the base is http://www.w3.org/reserved/http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema The problem is that the author has unwittingly created dark properties as well as light properties. This problem does not happen if: - we always use N-triple and not RDF/XML - we always use xml:base - we always use rdf:about and not rdf:ID in schemas Since any of these is a major change I am less than convinced by Hilbert's web server. Jeremy
Received on Monday, 1 July 2002 05:13:38 UTC