[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On 2002-02-21 12:50, "ext Anderson, John" <John@Barbadosoft.com> wrote:
> ... Which makes namespaceURI == vocabularyURI +
> RDDL an extremely sensible starting point -
Starting point, yes. Ending point, no. And we have to be
sure that the starting point solution does not end up as
an ending point obstacle.
> ... If there are
> variations or subsets of those vocabularies, there doesn't seem any reason
> not to put them there as well.
I fully agree. I've proposed as much. But RDDL as it is now does
not easily provide this.
RDDL with embedded RDF and arbitrary URI identifiers would.
> Is this perfect? No, but it is simple and
> solves 80% (or more) of the problem.
I agree. Makes me wonder why it is ignored. The silence about such
proposals is deafening.
> I guess there are those who will argue
> that a "vocabulary" can contain elements from many namespaces, but heck, if
> someone sends me a novel with some Spanish words in it, I don't expect them
> to be in the English dictionary.
>
> I don't know if XHTML provides a valid argument for "namespace N:N
> vocabulary". That is simply an interpretation. If they are different
> vocabularies, perhaps they should have been given different namespaces?
No. Simply distinct names. And the namespace is just treated as a point
of reference, a place to bundle together and provide access to such
namespace-related knowledge.
> It is an imperfect world, learn to live with it.
That's what technologies such as RDDL and RDF (etc. etc.) are
intended to do, help us live with an imperfect world (and maybe
make it a little less imperfect).
Cheers,
Patrick
--
Patrick Stickler Phone: +358 50 483 9453
Senior Research Scientist Fax: +358 7180 35409
Nokia Research Center Email: patrick.stickler@nokia.com
|
