[topicmapmail] PSIs?

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Lars Marius Garshol
|
| I agree it is bad for you to create URIs in their domain, but you
| wouldn't be doing that in this case. OWL already uses the same URIs,
| so you would just be following OWLs lead. I think it's much better for
| us to use the same URIs as the W3C for what is certainly the same
| subjects.   <URL: http://www.w3.org/TR/owl-ref/#rdf-datatype >

* Murray Altheim
| 
| OWL was published by the W3C. I don't see how this is relevant.

That means that the W3C has already defined these URIs as identifying
what you are describing them as identifying in your PSI set. That
means that you don't have to do anything except tell your users which
PSIs to use and how to use them with topic maps.

In other words: you don't have to define any new URIs. RDF is already
using the XSD ones. All you really need to do is annotate them with
information about how to use them in topic maps.
 
* Lars Marius Garshol
|
| The base URL given by xml:base doesn't affect the resolution of the
| IDs of <topic> elements. Officially this XTM issue isn't resolved yet,
| but I don't see how it can be resolved any other way.
 
* Murray Altheim
|
| Yes it does. It's not an XTM issue, it's an XML issue that has already
| been resolved. Read the spec (particularly the examples in section 3):
| 
|     http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlbase/
| 
| That's the whole point of xml:base. What other purpose could it
| serve?

Please read the references I sent you. This *only* applies to URIs of
the form "" and "#foo" and the resolution of <topic id>s into absolute
URIs. All other kinds of URI references are resolved relative to the
xml:base if one is specified. The thing is that "same-document
references", as RFC 2396 calls them, are a special case. The XML Base
specification doesn't discuss those at all.

The relevant bit of RFC 2396 is section 4.2:

   "A URI reference that does not contain a URI is a reference to the
   current document.  In other words, an empty URI reference within a
   document is interpreted as a reference to the start of that
   document, and a reference containing only a fragment identifier is
   a reference to the identified fragment of that document.  Traversal
   of such a reference should not result in an additional retrieval
   action.  However, if the URI reference occurs in a context that is
   always intended to result in a new request, as in the case of
   HTML's FORM element, then an empty URI reference represents the
   base URI of the current document and should be replaced by that URI
   when transformed into a request."

See also 
  <URL: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-xml-linking-comments/2001AprJun/0158.html >
  <URL: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/w3c-rdfcore-wg/2002May/0060.html >

In addition to all this there is the logic given in the rationale that
Graham and I put into our XTM resolutions proposal document that I
linked to in my previous email.

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50                  <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >