- From: Ron Daniel <rdaniel@interwoven.com>
- Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 14:14:20 -0800
- To: "'Dan Connolly'" <connolly@w3.org>, "'Aaron Swartz'" <aswartz@swartzfam.com>, <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
- Cc: <spec-comments@prismstandard.org>
Another comment from Dan was: >> * xmlns:prism="http://prismstandard.org/namespaces/1.0/basic/" > I recommend "...basic#" rather than "...basic/", because > "...basic/" necessarily denotes an HTTP resource, i.e. a sort > of generic document (i.e. a thing that responds to GET requests), > but RDF properties and classes might turn out to be disjoint > from HTTP resources. "...basic#foo" isn't > constrained the way "...basic/foo" is. For pragmatic reasons, specifically the concern over the 'download everything and dig through it' semantics of '#', we will stick with the use of the '/' character. Oh, this one was from Aaron: > However, I do think it would be rather useful to get > something at those > namespace URIs. RDDL will do just fine, and it has fragment > identifiers > defined (both by XPointer and by HTML!). Maybe later, but that is not required for the spec to work. Concerns like that dominate my thinking since I have a lo to do between now and April 9, when the 1.0 spec is released. Ron
Received on Thursday, 29 March 2001 17:15:49 UTC