Re: Updated: issue qnameAsId-18

Norm,

1) Can you confirm that the RDF practise of using qnames to represent URI 
REF's is consistent with this finding.  If so, you might like to mention 
this in section 2.

2) RDFCore has an outstanding issue to allow qnames as attribute values as 
a shorthand for a URI REF.  This would mean that RDF would have attributes 
which allowed either a URI or a qname in the same attribute value.  Would 
RDF be consistent with this finding if it were to go ahead and allow that.

Brian




At 15:19 04/06/2002 -0400, Norman Walsh wrote:

>In response to the meeting of 20 May[1] and private correspondence, I've
>updated the TAG Finding[2] on issue qnameAsId-18[3].
>
>                                         Be seeing you,
>                                           norm
>
>[1] http://www.w3.org/2002/05/20-tag-summary
>[2] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/qnameids
>[3] http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/ilist#qnameAsId-18
>
>--
>Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM   | Of all the preposterous assumptions of
>XML Standards Engineer | humanity over humanity, nothing exceeds most
>XML Technology Center  | of the criticisms made on the habits of the
>Sun Microsystems, Inc. | poor by the well-housed, well-warmed, and
>                        | well-fed.--Herman Melville

Received on Wednesday, 5 June 2002 11:11:11 UTC