- From: Dan Pokorny <dan@gingerall.cz>
- Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 14:14:33 +0100
- To: www-rdf-interest@w3.org
Thomas B. Passin wrote: > > [NAMESPACES] makes a clear distinction between a URI refernce as used > for a > namespace and a URI as used (functionally) as a URI reference: > > "[Definition:] URI references which identify namespaces are considered > identical when they are exactly the same character-for-character. Note > that > URI references which are not identical in this sense may in fact be > functionally equivalent. Examples include URI references which differ > only > in case, or which are in external entities which have different effective > base URIs. " > > According to this, there is no contradiction, and the two triples are not > equivalent. > Resources are identified by a /resource identifier/. A resource identifier is URI plus an optional anchor id. We have two different resources here (the properties, as they come from different namespaces according to [NAMESPACES]) that are identified by one URI plus the anchor id. I think that "is identified" means that there is (at most) one identified thing for one identifying thing. Am I wrong? > > > However, there is a different problem lurking here. According to > [URI], a > "URI Reference" by definition means what you have after the fragment > identifier has been removed. Therefore, by definition, > http://www.foo.com/ns#p1 cannot be a URI reference! In fact, the RDF M&S > refers to URI plus optional anchor id, not to URI reference. > > So [NAMESPACES] uses URI references, and RDF uses URI+fragment > identifier. > Hmm, what to do? > URI reference can contain a fragment identifier. From [URI]: A URI reference may be absolute or relative, and may have additional information attached in the form of a fragment identifier. However, "the URI" that results from such a reference includes only the absolute URI after the fragment identifier (if any) is removed and after any relative URI is resolved to its absolute form. URI-reference = [ absoluteURI | relativeURI ] [ "#" fragment ] Dan Pokorny
Received on Friday, 9 November 2001 08:14:56 UTC