RDF not conforming to the Namespace spec?

[John Cowan]

Roger L. Costello wrote:

> Okay, here's where the rub comes.  Let me give you a couple of quotes
> from the RDF spec (the *'s I have put in and are my way of emphasizing
> the words that I wish for you to really focus on):  "Property names
> *must* be associated with a schema.  This can be done by qualifying the
> element names with a namespace prefix to unambigously *connect* the
> property definition with the corresponding RDF schema ..."

Watch the modal verbs!  Property names *must* be associated with a
schema, but this can (i.e. *may*) be done by making the URI to
which the namespace prefix is bound the actual URI of the schema
document.

There may be other ways to do it.  Besides, RDF is free to set
tighter limits on the URIs used to identify namespaces than
XML in general.  XML-based standards can always set extra
requirements, like the SMIL requirement (clause 5.1) that there be no
internal DTD subset in SMIL documents.

-- 
John Cowan	http://www.ccil.org/~cowan		cowan at ccil.org
	You tollerday donsk?  N.  You tolkatiff scowegian?  Nn.
	You spigotty anglease?  Nnn.  You phonio saxo?  Nnnn.
		Clear all so!  'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)

xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev at ic.ac.uk
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1
To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
(un)subscribe xml-dev
To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo at ic.ac.uk the following message;
subscribe xml-dev-digest
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa at ic.ac.uk)