- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 03 Feb 2003 17:53:36 +0000
- To: pat hayes <phayes@ai.uwf.edu>
- CC: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org
I am happy to follow up with Joe ... Pat's text looks fine to me. Jeremy pat hayes wrote: > > Re. > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2003JanMar/0162.html, > I'm afraid I do not understand what the issue is to which I am > expected to respond. The semantics document introduces the xsd:prefix > with the following text (section 0.2): > > "We will also make extensive use of the Qname prefixes rdf:, rdfs: and > xsd: defined as follows: > > Prefix rdf: namespace URI: http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns# > > Prefix rdfs: namespace URI: http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema# > > Prefix xsd: namespace URI: http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema# > > Since Qname syntax is not legal N-triples syntax, and in the interests > of brevity and readability, we will use the convention whereby a Qname > is used without surrounding angle brackets to indicate the > corresponding uriref enclosed in angle brackets, eg the triple > > <ex:a> rdf:type rdfs:Property . > > should be read as an abbreviation for the N-triples syntax > > <ex:a> <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type> > <http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#Property> ." > > Can someone (Jeremy?) tell me in what way this is misleading? > > Pat
Received on Monday, 3 February 2003 12:49:21 UTC