rdf namespace reserved or not? from Jeremy Carroll on 2001-07-13 (www-rdf-interest@w3.org from July 2001) (original) (raw)

rdf:li AND rdf:_1 AS TYPES (reserving rdf: namespace)

rdf-containers-syntax-vs-schema/test005.rdf explicitly allows rdf:li and rdf:_1 to be types.

<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:foo="http://foo/"> rdf:_1/ rdf:li/ rdf:li/

In contrast, in rdfcore/rdf-ns-prefix-confusion/test08.rdf the rdf:aboutEachPrefix attribute is ignored.

Could you clarify what the correct processing of things from the rdf: namespace is when they are not recognised or do not make sense.

The original spec gave clear instructions:

'When an RDF processor encounters an XML element or attribute name that is declared to be from a namespace whose name begins with the string "http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax" [SIC] and the processor does not recognize the semantics of that name then the processor is required to skip (i.e., generate no tuples for) the entire XML element, including its content, whose name is unrecognized or that has an attribute whose name is unrecognized.'

In contrast, the intent of the Working Group seems to be that an RDF processor should treat an unrecognised or not understood Qname from rdf:XXX just like it would treat any other Qname (e.g. as a type or a property). So that now rdf:aboutEachPrefix must be specially recognised in order to be ignored!

I suggest that the original spec is a better intent - the rdf:XXX space is reserved. It might be better to skip only the attribute in the case of an unrecognised attribute; but I note that when a non-aboutEachPrefix supporting processor meets and rdf:aboutEachPrefix attribute the original behaviour of skipping the whole element is a good one.

I will give a few more corner cases: <rdf:Description rdf:li="the only way to give an rdf:li value"/> & what about

<rdf:Description rdf:Description="text string"/>

whereas presumably the insanely equivalent

rdf:Description rdf:Descriptiontext string

is still an error.

Jeremy Carroll HP Labs

Received on Friday, 13 July 2001 13:42:29 UTC