- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 16:27:53 +0200
- To: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org>, <www-tag@w3.org>
> From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of > Jonathan Borden > Sent: Thursday, May 23, 2002 4:17 PM > To: www-tag@w3.org > Subject: Re: [rdfmsQnameUriMapping-6] Algorithm for creating a URI from > a QName in RDF Model? > > > Julian Reschke wrote: > > > > > > > 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. > > > > Well. The XML namespaces recommendation allows URI references. > > True, but are there any widely 'deployed' XML Namespaces which are in fact > full URI references i.e. have a non-null fragment-id? I don't know. > > XML namespace names in URI schemes other than HTTP are very > common. So we > > need to clarify whether it's a requirement to map those QNames > as well. I > > think if we don't, this mapping isn't generic, and there's > little value in > > discussing it here... > > > > Having looked at this issue, there certainly are corner cases which will > 'break' any algorithm, however, having an algorithm that covers the 80/20 > point, is IMHO, far better than nothing. That is to say, partial > progress is > still progress. Well. I think the task was to find a *generic* mapping. If it's not generic enough to be usable to map RFC2518 properties or RFC3253 condition codes to URIs, I'm not interested :-).
Received on Thursday, 23 May 2002 10:28:26 UTC