You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository was archived by the owner on Jan 25, 2025. It is now read-only.
There is no single Markdown specification, i.a. GitHub Flavored Markdown (GFM), CommonMark.
Should these have seperate identifiers? I tend to think not, as rdf:HTML was originally defined with a valid value space of those strings that were valid according to DOM4, but the DOM specification has since been evolving and I've found no discussion on replacement identifiers for the datatype.
Some IRI's I found:
http://ns.ontowiki.net/SysOnt/Markdown, ardfs:Datatype. Used by DBpedia, as well as Eccenca for building widgets' UI.xtypes:Document-Markdown, ardfs:Datatype. Via http://graphite.ecs.soton.ac.uk/xtypes/, that defines many, many more datatypes.mime:markdown;charset=utf-8represents the mimetype from the IANA registry. Askos:Concept.On different specifications
There is no single Markdown specification, i.a. GitHub Flavored Markdown (GFM), CommonMark.
Should these have seperate identifiers? I tend to think not, as
rdf:HTMLwas originally defined with a valid value space of those strings that were valid according to DOM4, but the DOM specification has since been evolving and I've found no discussion on replacement identifiers for the datatype.References
Wouter Beek, Filip Ilievski, Jeremy Debattista, Stefan Schlobach & Jan Wielemaker. (2018). "Literally better: Analyzing and
improving the quality of literals". Semantic Web, 9(1), 131-150. https://doi.org/10.3233/SW-17028 (Public copy: https://research.vu.nl/ws/portalfiles/portal/123184040/Literally_better_Analyzing_and_improving_the_quality_of_literals.pdf)