Multibase XSD & RDF Literal Datatype IRI

[vorburger]

What shall the IRI of a Multibase datatype (in a RDF Literal or RDFS, but even XML, or a JSON Schema, or whatever) be?

You know, like e.g. xsd:hexBinary or xsd:base64Binary.

We could say / here agree upon / specify / document it's e.g. https://multiformats.io/multibase ? It's just a shame that 404s. Where is the repo for that website, so that I can contribute a fix for that?

[lidel]

I believe website is at https://github.com/multiformats/website

[vorburger]

I believe website is at https://github.com/multiformats/website

Thanks! PR multiformats/website#83 raised.

If that gets merged, then perhaps this issue is as simple as adding (something like) this text to that:

Note that the URL of this page (`https://multiformats.io/multibase`)
can be used as Datatype IRI for this format e.g. in XML and RDF Literals
(similar e.g. to `xsd:hexBinary` or `xsd:base64Binary`.

Or should we use another IRI?

[vorburger]

Or should we use another IRI?

https://multiformats.io/multibaseBinary, à la xsd:hexBinary or xsd:base64Binary, perhaps?

That would actually leave the door a bit more open for there to also be a few other IRIs, perhaps:

• https://multiformats.io/multibaseBinary a rdfs:Datatype
• https://multiformats.io/Multibase a rdfs:Class of a Multibase
• https://multiformats.io/Multibase/base64 a https://multiformats.io/Multibase (or subclass?!)
• ...

[lidel]

I am not familiar with RDF enough to provide meaningful answer, but the whole point of Multibase is be self-describing string-based representaton of arbitrary bytes in arbitrary base. Constructs like multibase/Multibase/multibaseBinary, or /Multibase/base64 "feel" contrary to that mission.

Perhaps keep it simple and use https://multiformats.io/multibase everywhere? It is always an opaque string that self-describes how to decode it.

[ben221199]

Maybe use an URN?

[vorburger]

Constructs like multibase/Multibase/multibaseBinary, or /Multibase/base64 "feel" contrary to that mission.

Agreed, of course. But those wouldn't be describing the string value of a self describing Multibase instance, but https://multiformats.io/Multibase/base64 could be the IRI of the Class of the Base64 encoding. (You could use that to declare RDF triples ABOUT that base.) But let's perhaps ignore such ideas (from me) here, and in this issue focus solely on defining the IRI of the RDF Datatype of a Multibase, only; ignore above.

https://multiformats.io/multibaseBinary is on further thought IMHO actually the most natural IRI for it (the datatype). That *Binary suffix very clearly evokes it as the alternative that it really is to (very) "well know" xsd:hexBinary or xsd:base64Binary.

So for example in the 🐢 Turtle (TTL) syntax of RDF (see Wikipedia, or on enola.dev), one would use it like so:

@prefix ex: <http://example.org/stuff/1.0/>.
@prefix mf: <https://multiformats.io/>.
@prefix schema: <https://schema.org/>.
@prefix xsd: <http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema#>.

ex:dude1 a schema:Person
  schema:email "dude1@example.org";
  enola:pubKey
    "fe1b7c..."^^xsd:hexBinary
    "TWFueSBoYW5kcyBtYWtlIGxpZ2h0IHdvcmsu"^^xsd:base64Binary
    "z8VttgvnrXN5ZzqAh8BLwyup7htUmSM9gbKR445teEECTwMRDQTireiW..."^^mf:multibaseBinary
    "🚀🖥😋🎉😜🌔🤞🌔💕👐..."^^mf:multibaseBinary.

[vorburger]

Maybe use an URN?

My understanding is that using a URL as an IRI for a Datatype is common and preferable if for nothing else than simply being able to put up some documentation for human consumption curiosity about it at that URL. (One could also serve RDF as TTL, or another serialization, from that URL, but it's neither technically "required" nor does it seem to be particularly common.)