- From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>
- Date: Sun, 28 Jan 2001 12:06:27 -0500
- To: "Dave Beckett" <dave.beckett@bristol.ac.uk>
- Cc: "RDF Interest" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Dave Beckett wrote: > > ... and this is exactly what we have been discussing. This property > allows the relationship to be made without doing any delving into > parsing URIs - which isn't possible for general URIs. I think RDF > shouldn't get into this game. Unfortunately RDF is already in this game in RDF M&S 1.0. Every typedNode qname is converted into a URI which is the subject of the rdf:type. As we know this is fine for 'RDF aware' namespaces but broken for namespaces which end in a letter or number e.g. http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchema, this acute problem this causes is the definition of XSD datatypes e.g.: <xsd:unsignedInt rdf:about="http://www.foo.org/someNumber/123"> ... </xsd:unsignedInt> Ought RDF applications use XML Schema datatypes? What triples ought be generated? Certainly not: http://www.w3.org/2000/10/XMLSchemaunsignedInt N3 already appends a '#' to such namespaces in a bind. -Jonathan
Received on Sunday, 28 January 2001 12:03:24 UTC