Re: Possible buf of SiRPAC (relative URI resolution for "resource" attribute)

On Wed, Nov 22, 2000 at 10:54:35AM +0900, Ryo Asai wrote:
> 
> Does anyone tell me SiRPAC$B!G(Bs implementation is right or not.
FYI - this issue was raised a while ago by someone from the 
CC/PP WG:
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2000AprJun/0013.html
and given the response from Ralph Swick (co-editor of the M&S spec):
 http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-comments/2000AprJun/0014.html
my take is that SiRPAC is following the "expectation of the Working
Group". 
Note, however, that Ralph states:
 In fact, the RDF Model and Syntax specification does not tell you
 how to construct a full URI for the resource named by an ID or bagID.
 The resources are addressable at best only locally within the
 same RDF/XML expression.
Given that the construction of a full URI is not specified, it seems
like SiRPAC [and any other system that constructs such a URI] should 
be "right" or "not wrong" :-).
Art
---

Received on Wednesday, 22 November 2000 08:25:08 UTC

AltStyle $B$K$h$C$FJQ49$5$l$?%Z!<%8(b (->$B%*%j%8%J%k(B) /