Re: Generic processing of Fragment IDs in RFC 3023bis

On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 9:26 AM, Alan Ruttenberg
<> wrote:
> On Sat, Oct 9, 2010 at 10:37 PM, Tim Berners-Lee <> wrote:
>> If rdf:ID is defined as having uniqueness constraints then it is surely broken for
>> RDF as the same thing can of course be referred to in lots of of places
>> in the file, with exactly the same syntax.
> Well... no.
> You have to use rdf:about the other times.

FWIW, I consider it bad practice to use rdf:ID because of this reason.
There's no reason to not use rdf:about in all cases.

> -Alan
>> Tim
>>> Jonathan Rees wrote:
>>>> [...] The RDF/XML DTD
>>>> ( gives the rdf:ID attribute
>>>> type ID, and the XML specs (including xml:id and Xpointer) do their
>>>> very best to ensure that attributes with type ID are as much as
>>>> possible the same as xml:id. The RDF/XML spec also makes rdf:ID very
>>>> similar to xml:id - same syntactic and uniqueness constraints. So it
>>>> seemed highly likely to me that rdf:ID defines fragids the same way
>>>> that xml:id does.

Received on Monday, 11 October 2010 13:27:55 UTC