- From: Dave Beckett <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2003 17:31:13 +0000
- To: Garret Wilson <garret@globalmentor.com>
- cc: www-rdf-comments@w3.org
>>>Garret Wilson said: > > I'm thinking of specifications built on top of RDF that may try to hide > technical details of RDF from the user. rdf:about and rdf:reference did > that somewhat by talking about relationships between *resources*, but > the name "rdf:nodeID" presupposes a knowledge of some graphical > representation of RDF---relationships between nodes in a graph. > > Has anyone proposed other names for rdf:nodeID just to be user-friendly, > such as one of the following? We considered other names but I don't know if they were ever recorded > rdf:localID > rdf:internalID > rdf:tempID > > The only one I really like is rdf:localID. The rest don't seem to work, > but then rdf:nodeID doesn't seem quite right, either. I'm not sure I really see a compelling reason to change from rdf:nodeID. The only one not here that I can think of is rdf:resourceID - compare to rdf:resource. It probably would also suffer from confusion from the similarity. Dave
Received on Tuesday, 21 January 2003 12:33:08 UTC