- From: Pierre-Antoine CHAMPIN <champin@bat710.univ-lyon1.fr>
- Date: Tue, 01 Aug 2000 08:46:26 +0200
- To: caro@Adobe.COM
- CC: Graham Klyne <GK@Dial.pipex.com>, "McBride, Brian" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, RDF-list <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
"Perry A. Caro" wrote: > Graham Klyne wrote: > > > > > It seems to me that the requirement to find the > > > > namespace-related > > > > portion of a URI in isolation is not reasonable. > > Agreed. > > > > > It's also > > > > not clear to me > > > > what purpose it serves. > > One purpose would be reserialization of the model. Doesn't anyone else need > to do this? We do. Our processors are essentially filters: import RDF, > modify it, export RDF, pass it down the chain. > > Of course, our system doesn't concatanate the URI, so recovering the > namespace is not an issue. This is an issue for most people since the RDF syntax does not use XML namespaces (XML-NS) the way they were designed for : - concatenation of namespace-name and element-name, instead of keeping it as a pair - requirement for the namespace-name to be the schema's URI You solved it by sticking to XML-NS specifications more than required by RDF M&S, but the real problem is IMHO in the RDF syntax not being compliant with XML-NS. Pierre-Antoine
Received on Tuesday, 1 August 2000 02:46:20 UTC