- From: Gabe Beged-Dov <begeddov@jfinity.com>
- Date: Sat, 29 Apr 2000 20:41:49 -0700
- To: Chris Waterson <waterson@netscape.com>
- CC: www-rdf-interest@w3.org, edd@xmlhack.com
Chris Waterson wrote: > <foo:bar rdf:resource="baz" /> > > as really meaning: > > <foo:bar resource="baz" />. I think there are two related questions about the rdf attributes (about, ID, resource, etc..) . The first is how to deal with them when they are specified on an element from the RDF namespace. The second is how to deal with them on all other elements. The examples in the specs and some of the postings to rdf-comments indicate that the rdf attributes should be unqualified when specified on an rdf element and qualified when specified on a non-rdf element (see Ralph Swick's comments in [1] for example). There is a question whether an RDF processor should treat RDF-qualified attributes on RDF elements as equivalent to the unqualified attributes. This has also been brought up and Tim Bray responded to it [2] saying that they can (but aren't required to) be viewed as equivalent. The example you bring up is of an unqualified attribute that is being treated as qualified by the RDF namespace when on an element that is not from the RDF namespace. I don't think that this falls under any interpretation of the namespace spec. It does match up with the formal grammar and some (but not most) of the examples in the M&S spec. I look forward to hearing some unambiguous guidance from the editors on this issue. BTW, where can we find the errata/issues list for the M&S spec? Gabe [1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/1999OctDec/0003.html [2] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/1999JulSep/0017.html -- --------------------------- http://www.jfinity.com/gabe
Received on Saturday, 29 April 2000 23:41:25 UTC