I was wondering if it is better / better to refer to entities using the fragment identifier format - mainly by inserting a hash before the name
[url] + # + [name] => http://example.com/page/#webPage
EDIT:
Following the kind response from the ubiquitous and wonderful @Unor, I added this change to try to limit the scope of my request and clarify the main problem that I am getting. I also deleted most of the original question (about 95%), which (in hindsight) I feel distracts from: 1. my main question; and 2. Benefits to future readers.
Here is my short problem:
Is the practice of manually entering a hash at the beginning of the microdata itemid and json-ld @id data values valid?
Here is my question, expressed in more detail:
Is it possible to insert the HASH (#) symbol in the values of the microdata itemid element and the json-ld @id values to create valid resulting URIs with the correct and reliable use of the fragment identifier?
So if this is on the webpage:
<div itemscope itemtype="http://www.schema.org/Person" itemid="#joe"></div>
Or, if it is also on a web page:
{"@context":"http://schema.org",
"@type":"Person",
"@id":"#Joe"}
I understand that they will be read in order to make such a uri (assuming a relative construction by the consumer, like the Google tool for structured data):
http://www.example.com/page
This is uri:
source
share