- From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Date: Mon, 08 Apr 2002 09:30:41 -0700
- To: www-tag@w3.org
At 01:43 PM 08/04/02 +0100, Williams, Stuart wrote: >Which links the namespace with an RDF blank node that represents the RDDL >directory entry. The directory entry carries properties for RDDL purpose, >prose description and related resource. The nature property is attached to >the RDF node that represents the related resource. The point I keep trying to make is that the properties like "nature", "purpsoe", and "description", are properties <emph>of the related resource</emph>, not of the namespace or of the RDDL or of the directory entry. T >One of the things that does concern me a bit is the conflation of the >namespace and the namespace document under a single URI. No matter how hard I try I can't get worried. A namespace name names a namespace. It can be used to retrieve a directory which contains pointers to resources related to that namespace, and descriptions of those related resources. Those resources can include human-readable descriptive text, and can optionally be located right there in the directory. >We are now left with the question of whether http://www.rddl.org/#Nature >names a type of XML element or whether it identifies a fragment within a >RDDL document. The interpretation of '#Nature' is different depending on whether it's pointing into an XHTML file (whether it's a RDDL or not) or an RDF schema or whatever. I don't think there's room for confusion. >This is of course just a variant of whether http://www.rddl.org/ names a >namespace or a namespace document. It names a namespace. That's not in question. If dereferencing the resource returns a namespace document, that's a good and useful optional extra. -Tim
Received on Monday, 8 April 2002 12:30:51 UTC