W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > May 2002

Re: [rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6] Algorithm for creating a URI from a QName in RDF Model?

From: Sean B. Palmer <sean@mysterylights.com>
Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 14:41:17 +0100
Message-ID: <009901c2025f$86ba4c20$7bbd0150@localhost>
To: "Mark Baker" <distobj@acm.org>, "Julian Reschke" <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Cc: "Brian McBride" <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "Tim Bray" <tbray@textuality.com>, <www-tag@w3.org>
> I believe that a namespace is a resource, not a document
> fragment, and as such, should be identified by a URI, not
> a URI reference.

Whilst your wording there is unclear, I hope you're not stating that URIs
plus fragments necessarily identify some subset of resources or - worse
still - some series of characters/bytes. RFC 2396 is quite clear (or quite
vague depending on how you look at it) by stating:-

[[[
   [...] the format and interpretation of fragment identifiers is
   dependent on the media type [RFC2046] of the retrieval
   result.
]]] - http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2396.txt

As far as I can discern from the RFC, it does not give any constraints as
to the interpretation of the fragment identifiers given above. It defers
the interpretation (and therefore the constraints upon the semantics) of
the fragment and that which it identifies to the media type specification.

Practically, rdf:ID would be a total disaster if chunks of documents were
the only things that could be referenced by fragment identifers.

--
Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
@prefix : <http://purl.org/net/swn#> .
:Sean :homepage <http://purl.org/net/sbp/> .
Received on Thursday, 23 May 2002 09:41:24 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:31 UTC