- From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
- Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 22:07:35 +0000
- To: "Jonathan Borden" <jonathan@openhealth.org>
- Cc: <www-tag@w3.org>
At 02:29 PM 11/17/02 -0500, Jonathan Borden wrote: >The above is, in RDF syntax terms, a "typed node element". RDF allows alot >(in many cases too much) flexibility in how the XML determines the graph >(set of triples). In particular the pattern: > ><rddl:resource ID="foo"> > <rddl:nature resource="http://example.org/nature"/> > <rddl:purpose resource="http://example.org/purpose"/> > <rddl:related resource="http://example.org/L.dtd"/> > <rddl:prose> > <p>A description of the "L" language</p> > </rddl:prose> ></rddl:resource> > >uses unqualified attributes: ID and resource, but any namespace qualified >element may be interpreted as a "Typed Node" in which case the URI >equivalent of the element name is the rdf:type of the described RDF >resource. Interesting! After all these years (it seems) I really hadn't considered that one might use RDF without actually invoking the RDF namespace. It even gets through the online validator (with warnings) modulo the rddl namespace decl and <p> issue you noted later. I have a niggle about possible confusion of non-namespace-prefixed resource attributes, so maybe one should be careful about eliding the RDF namespace prefix. #g ------------------- Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Received on Wednesday, 20 November 2002 17:16:39 UTC