- From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
- Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 08:45:50 -0400
- To: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- CC: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org, Eric Miller <em@w3.org>
Dave Beckett wrote: > On Fri, 01 Aug 2003 19:16:56 -0400 > Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org> wrote: > > >>Dave (and for everyone's information)-- >> >>Regarding your comments below on the XPackage examples: >> >>I reviewed the XPackage examples again (I *thought* I'd validated them, >>and it turns out I had). The complete example 37 (with all the >>namespaces declared) is: >> >><?xml version="1.0"?> >><xpackage:description >> xmlns:xpackage="http://xpackage.org/namespaces/2003/xpackage#" >> xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" >> xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#" >> xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" >> xmlns:mime="http://xpackage.org/namespaces/2003/mime#" >> xmlns:x="http://xpackage.org/namespaces/2003/xml#" >> xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink"> >> <rdf:RDF> >><!--doc.html--> >> <rdf:Description rdf:about="urn:example:xhtmldocument-doc"> >> <rdfs:comment>The XHTML document.</rdfs:comment> >> <xpackage:location xlink:href="doc.html"/> >> <mime:contentType>application/xhtml+xml</mime:contentType> >> <x:namespace rdf:resource="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"/> >> <x:style rdf:resource="urn:example:xhtmldocument-stylesheet"/> >> <dc:creator>Garret Wilson</dc:creator> >> <xpackage:manifest rdf:parseType="Collection"> >> <rdf:Description >> rdf:about="urn:example:xhtmldocument-stylesheet"/> >> <rdf:Description >> rdf:about="urn:example:xhtmldocument-image"/> >> </xpackage:manifest> >> </rdf:Description> >> >> </rdf:RDF> >></xpackage:description> >> >>This validates in the W3C RDF validator. In the generated triples, the >>xpackage:location property has a blank node as its object, and the blank >>node in turn has a http://www.w3.org/1999/xlinkhref property whose value >>is the literal "doc.html". Example 38 works the same way. Does this >>not square with your understanding of what's supposed to happen? >> > > It does. What you describe in the first sentence is what I explained > in my comment. Well, maybe we have a terminology problem then, because when you said "That is not RDF/XML", I thought you meant it wasn't syntactically legal, and wouldn't validate. It seems to me that that if syntax is not legal RDF/XML, a correctly-operating RDF/XML parser should say so. Generating non-intuitive results from legal RDF/XML syntax is a separate issue (people have expressed amazement as what parseType="Collection" does, for example!) > The point is, the xlink:href is not special, and RDF/XML > has no special processing for it's value - which looks like a URI. > It might be misleading if people read it that way. > <xpackage:location xlink:href="doc.html"/> > makes 2 triples - which I think is only clear if you recognised that > abbreviation, or tried it out, such as by using a validator: > _:a xpackage:location _:b . > _:b xlink:href "doc.html" . > > (I'm sad to see this abbreviation used, I would have liked to have killed it) > > Dave > > -- Frank Manola The MITRE Corporation 202 Burlington Road, MS A345 Bedford, MA 01730-1420 mailto:fmanola@mitre.org voice: 781-271-8147 FAX: 781-271-875
Received on Monday, 4 August 2003 09:26:25 UTC