search

w3c / rdf-star

RDF-star specification
https://w3c.github.io/rdf-star/
Other
119 stars 23 forks source link

reach out for the community about adding an IRI to the rdf: namespace #134

Closed pchampin closed 3 years ago

pchampin commented 3 years ago

As decided during call: https://w3c.github.io/rdf-star/Minutes/2021-03-12.html#x117

This is related to #102

pchampin commented 3 years ago

done at: https://www.w3.org/mid/368d0629-fb7c-4ff8-1dfe-f7c93bbd7f04@ercim.eu

TallTed commented 3 years ago

A somewhat-less opaque link to the relevant message -- https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2021Mar/0034.html

ericprud commented 3 years ago

A somewhat-less opaque link to the relevant message -- https://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/semantic-web/2021Mar/0034.html

Meta: I encourage people to use MID links as they are intrinsic to the message, as well as useful to the reader (I use IMAP to fetch messages by MID). "0034" has no intrinsic grounding in the message and is at the mercy of order of mbox entries.

TallTed commented 3 years ago

@ericprud -

Yes, mid has intrinsic grounding in the message, and enforces the opacity of URIs.

On the other hand, Archives/Public/semantic-web/2021Mar tells you some things without you needing to dereference the message (i.e., the month and year it was distributed, and to what distribution list).

I find the latter details more helpful than the former, so I prefer the Archives links to the mid links.