- From: Eric Prud'hommeaux <eric@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 2 Sep 2003 07:56:41 -0400
- To: Frank Manola <fmanola@mitre.org>
- Cc: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, Art Barstow <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>, Charlie Abela <abcharl@keyworld.net>, www-rdf-interest@w3.org
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 11:43:58AM -0400, Frank Manola wrote: > Perhaps option A could be improved by making the dummy URI that is > generated be more explicit in describing itself: like > "http://example.generatedRelativeToTheLocationOfThisPage.org" > > --Frank The current one may be acceptable in this regard as it generates ones like http://www.w3.org/RDF/Validator/run/1062074071150#fragmentHere where the run number is unique each time (unless two requests come in in the same milisecond). > Jeremy Carroll wrote: > > > > > > > > > > >Jeremy: > > > >>>>I suggest one of the following fixes in the validator code: > >>>>a) specify an arbitrary base URI instead of "" > >>>> > >>>>or > >>>>b) tell ARP to ignore this condition > >>>> setErrorMode( > >>>> ARPErrorNumbers.WARN_RESOLVING_URI_AGAINST_EMPTY_BASE, > >>>> ARPErrorNumbers.EM_IGNORE ); > >>>> > >>>>Personally I think option (b) is better. > >>>> > > > > > >Eric?: > > > >>>Any particular reason? I have no great preference for A, but it does > >>>seem like the triples generated by allowing unanchored relative URIs > >>>might cause someone trouble down the line. > >> > > > > > > > >I am not unhappy with A. > > > >My weak pref for B is based on the dummy URI being arbitrary and hence > >potentially confusing for someone who asks, "where does that URI come > >from?" > > > >Admittedly option B may be confusing for someone who says "but the > >validator permits relative URIs". > > > >Given A is implemented let's go with that. > > > >Jeremy > > > > > -- > Frank Manola The MITRE Corporation > 202 Burlington Road, MS A345 Bedford, MA 01730-1420 > mailto:fmanola@mitre.org voice: 781-271-8147 FAX: 781-271-875 > -- -eric office: +1.617.258.5741 NE43-344, MIT, Cambridge, MA 02144 USA cell: +1.857.222.5741 (eric@w3.org) Feel free to forward this message to any list for any purpose other than email address distribution.
Received on Tuesday, 2 September 2003 07:56:41 UTC