- From: Alan Lillich <alillich@adobe.com>
- Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 09:05:15 -0700
- To: <Art.Barstow@nokia.com>
- CC: <www-rdf-validator@w3.org>
on 6/28/02 9:56 AM, Art.Barstow@nokia.com at Art.Barstow@nokia.com wrote: > Regarding your note to the RDF Validator mail list: > http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-validator/2002Jun/0022.html > There are two questions - why is the object of triple #1 "online:type" instead > of: "type". And why is the subject of triple #3: "online:" instead of an empty > string. The question I was really asking is not why the "online" appears in the model for prop2. My question is really why prop1 and prop2 are different, regardless of which is right/better. The examples are shown below. Since prop1 is simply the typedNode form of prop2, I would expect them to have the same model. Since they don't, I'm left wondering: 1. Is the validator is wrong for one or the other? 2. Am I wrong in expecting the typeNode form to be truly equivalent to the explicit form? It seems like your answer about URI expansion might be saying that I am wrong in expecting equivalence in this edge case where the type is not in a namespace? <rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"> <rdf:Description rdf:about="" xmlns:ns="ns:test/"> <ns:prop1> <type ns:attr="value"/> </ns:prop1> <ns:prop2 rdf:parseType="Resource"> <rdf:type rdf:resource="type"/> <ns:attr>value"</ns:attr> </ns:prop2> <rdf:Description> </rdf:RDF> Alan.
Received on Monday, 8 July 2002 12:04:27 UTC