- From: Jonathan Borden <jonathan@openhealth.org>
- Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 13:39:01 -0400
- To: <www-tag@w3.org>, "Graham Klyne" <GK@NineByNine.org>
Graham Klyne wrote: > > At 11:41 28/07/03 -0400, Jonathan Borden wrote: > >In the context of the media type "application/rdf+xml" the returned > >representation is to be interpreted as RDF > >http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#section-Social > > Datum: this section has been pulled in response to last-call comments. > > cf. http://www.w3.org/2001/sw/RDFCore/20030123-issues/#pfps-14 > I see. OWL references RDF Concepts in regard to the application/rdf+xml media type -- which is the anchor I was looking for. I see that http://www.w3.org/TR/rdf-concepts/#section-fragID also discusses the fashion in which a URI ref is to be interpreted by an RDF application given the above media type. This seems to be a much better description and summarizes: "This provides a handling of URI references and their denotation that is consistent with the RDF model theory and usage, and also with conventional Web behavior." Another indication that the conventional and semantic Web's can interoperate. Hopefully this section will remain :-) Jonathan
Received on Monday, 28 July 2003 13:39:08 UTC