Re: ISSUE-84 (Cool URIs and HTTPRange-14): The W3C TAG has asked us to mention that the use of fragment identifiers can be problematic [LC Comment - RDFa Core 1.1]

I would agree with this restriction. @profile values should indeed be absolute URI-s, and I have not found any explicit text in the document that says so. I guess this should be added to, eg, section 9.

I would not care too much whether the @profile has a fragment or not, as long as it is clear that the fragments are, essentially, stripped by the HTTP rules.

I would actually add the same restriction to @vocab.


On Feb 8, 2011, at 11:18 , Nathan wrote:

> Ivan Herman wrote:
>> There may be one more additional feature we may want to add to the text, beyond what the TAG might give us: avoid using fragid-s in profile URI-s. That is the only URI that an RDFa processor will dereference, and two different URI-s differing by a fragid only will return the same graph. On the other hand, using two different URI-s for the same graph my make the local caching process inefficient (unless clients would strip the fragid part before caching but I would not expect them to do that...)
> 
> Hmm, should we be clarifying the definition of @profile to accept a whitespace separated list of absolute-URIs (never relative, never with fragment) to avoid /some/ unexpected behaviour?
> 
> * I say some, because people could still use "mailto:bob@example.org", but I figure we shouldn't cater for people who like to do things like that!
> 
> Best,
> 
> Nathan
> 
>>>>> ISSUE-84
> 


----
Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead
Home: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/
mobile: +31-641044153
PGP Key: http://www.ivan-herman.net/pgpkey.html
FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf