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: 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>
Message-ID: <JIEGINCHMLABHJBIGKBCAEGBEKAA.julian.reschke@gmx.de>
> 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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:55:51 UTC