I'm trying to understand whether there is a subset of legal RDFa where
namespaces and curie shortcuts aren't used, in other words, where full
length URIs are used without abbrevation.
http://validator.w3.org seems to think
http://svn.foaf-project.org/foaftown/2009/rdfa/tests/t4.html is
reasonable RDFa.
But librdfa/raptor seems to think not.
Here's the commandline check:
Airbag:tests danbri$ rapper -i rdfa t4.html
rapper: Parsing URI
file:///Users/danbri/working/foaftown/2009/rdfa/tests/t4.html with
parser rdfa
rapper: Serializing with serializer ntriples
_:bnode0 <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
<http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person> .
_:bnode0 <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage> <http://example.com/eve/> .
_:bnode0 <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name> "Eve"@en .
_:bnode1 <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
<http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person> .
_:bnode1 <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage> <http://example.com/manu/> .
_:bnode1 <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name> "Manu"@en .
rapper: Parsing returned 6 triples
Airbag:tests danbri$ rapper -i rdfa t1.html
rapper: Parsing URI
file:///Users/danbri/working/foaftown/2009/rdfa/tests/t1.html with
parser rdfa
rapper: Serializing with serializer ntriples
_:bnode0 <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
<http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person> .
_:bnode0 <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage> <http://example.com/bob/> .
_:bnode0 <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name> "Bob"@en .
_:bnode1 <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
<http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person> .
_:bnode1 <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage> <http://example.com/eve/> .
_:bnode1 <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name> "Eve"@en .
_:bnode2 <http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#type>
<http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person> .
_:bnode2 <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage> <http://example.com/manu/> .
_:bnode2 <http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name> "Manu"@en .
rapper: Parsing returned 9 triples
Airbag:tests danbri$
Here's the main markup. The question is whether the 'Bob' section is wrong.
<div xmlns:foaf="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/";>
<ul>
<li typeof="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/Person";>
<a property="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/name";
rel="http://xmlns.com/foaf/0.1/homepage";
href="http://example.com/bob/";>Bob</a>
</li>
<li typeof="foaf:Person">
<a property="foaf:name" rel="foaf:homepage"
href="http://example.com/eve/";>Eve</a>
</li>
<li typeof="foaf:Person">
<a property="foaf:name" rel="foaf:homepage"
href="http://example.com/manu/";>Manu</a>
</li>
</ul>
</div>
I looked in the RDFa test cases and couldn't find one that checked this,
though I may have missed something. Reading
http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_curieprocessing I have almost
persuaded myself that the long form is acceptable:
[[
Many of the attributes that hold URIs are also able to carry 'compact
URIs' or CURIEs. A CURIE is a convenient way to represent a long URI, by
replacing a leading section of the URI with a substitution token. It's
possible for authors to define a number of substitution tokens as they
see fit; the full URI is obtained by locating the mapping defined by a
token from a list of in-scope tokens, and then simply concatenating the
second part of the CURIE onto the mapped value.
]]
...on the reading that if we don't declare any namespaces/CURIE
bindings, we can say the list of substitution tokens is empty, and just
put the full thing in as the 'CURIE'.
http://www.w3.org/TR/rdfa-syntax/#s_curies seems to make this reading
harder though.
curie := [ [ prefix ] ':' ] reference
prefix := NCName
reference := irelative-ref (as defined in [IRI])
Nevertheless, I get
http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=http%3A%2F%2Fsvn.foaf-project.org%2Ffoaftown%2F2009%2Frdfa%2Ftests%2Ft4.html&charset=%28detect+automatically%29&doctype=Inline&group=0&user-agent=W3C_Validator%2F1.606
from the validator.
What's up? If there's a way of squeezing thru the interpretation that
full URIs are acceptable, this could help with identifying a subset that
works easily in HTML5.
cheers,
Dan
--
http://danbri.org/
