W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > June 2002

RE: Q to implementers: Resource identifiers - XML Names and/or(concatenated) URIs? (was RE: rdfs.isDefinedBy...)

From: Jeremy Gray <jeremy@jeremygray.ca>
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 2002 06:59:50 -0700
To: "'Patrick Stickler'" <patrick.stickler@nokia.com>, "'ext Thomas B. Passin'" <tpassin@comcast.net>, "'RDF Interest'" <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <000601c21150$417c0d60$1c03b742@Dora9>

(from Thomas)
> > I do agree with you this far - it ought to be possible to avoid using
> > namespaces and prefixes in RDF/XML syntax if you want to.

(from Patrick)
> Yes, that would be better than nothing, and would also provide
> for a sort of imperfect round-tripping where qnames are mapped
> to URIs in the graph and output then only as URIs -- though that
> might also lead to alot of user confusion since the input/output
> will not be syntactically identical (even though it will be
> semantically identical).

They would be neither syntactically or semantically identical because the
resulting URI would bear absolutely no relation to the identity expressed in
the original qname. A qname represents an identifier formed from a namespace
and a local part, but not some concatenation thereof. Since this at the core
of what we've been discussing, perhaps you meant something different from
what came out in your post?

Jeremy Gray
Received on Tuesday, 11 June 2002 10:00:22 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:44:37 UTC