- From: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
- Date: Sat, 04 May 2002 18:29:50 -0400
- To: Garret Wilson <garret@globalmentor.com>
- CC: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
Garret Wilson wrote: > In the RDF Primer working draft 26 April 2002, the following section is > included, copied from the old RDF Schema working draft: > > <!-- Note: this RDF schema would typically be used in RDF instance data > by referencing it with an XML namespace declaration, for example > xmlns:xyz="http://www.w3.org/2000/03/example/vehicles#". This allows > us to use abbreviations such as xyz:MotorVehicle to refer > unambiguously to the RDF class 'MotorVehicle'. --> > > That's correct for *usage* of the RDF vocabulary being defined, but it's not > clear (and was not clear in the old RDF Schema specification) that in order > for IDs to actually work for *defining* the RDF vocabulary, an > xml:base="http://www.w3.org/2000/03/example/vehicles" will have to be > present. My reading would have been that what this example omitted in the original Schema document was a qualification along the lines of "assuming the schema was located at http://www.w3.org/2000/03/example/vehicles..." (was XML Base in existence when the original Schema document was finalized?). Given that qualification, I don't believe xml:base *has* to be present, since xml:base is used to specify a base URI *other than the base URI of the document* (when you need such an alternate base URI). On the other hand, it's certainly true that the Primer currently doesn't explain the use of xml:base. --Frank -- 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 Saturday, 4 May 2002 18:19:24 UTC