> From [log in to unmask] Tue Aug 13 14:40 MET 2002
> Mail-Followup-To: [log in to unmask]
> Mime-Version: 1.0
> Content-Disposition: inline
> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i
> X-Uptime: 11:17am up 9 days, 47 min, 5 users, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
> X-PGP-Key: http://chris.croome.net/pgp.html
> X-PGP-KeyID: 0x8BB2DE91
> Date: Tue, 13 Aug 2002 13:40:23 +0100
> From: Chris Croome <[log in to unmask]>
> Subject: Re: Registry Update
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> Hi
>
> On Tue 13-Aug-2002 at 01:21:39PM +0100, Andy Powell wrote:
> > > >
> > > > http://purl.org/dc/terms/
>
> This is the _namespace_ right? As far as I'm aware it's still an open
> issue with the TAG _if_ and _what_ should be at the end of a namespace
> -- are there really applications that _rely_ on broken RDF being at
> namespace URIs?
Depends on what you denote with "rely": The RDF Schema are typically used as reference
material people send me to ask about the non-existing DC qualifiers
"classification" and "note".
Some of them become upset, when i tell them they built their applications
on non-existing terms.
THIS HAS NOTHING to do with RDF or any deep considerations about namespace URIs -
It just a simple matter of documentation, that a standards body has to do!
It should be noted that the W3C ITSELF puts any kind of stuff at the end of namespace
URI's - try by yourself!
rs
>
> Chris
>
> --
> Chris Croome <[log in to unmask]>
> web design http://www.webarchitects.co.uk/
> web content management http://mkdoc.com/
> everything else http://chris.croome.net/
>
>
|