W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-bpwg@w3.org > September 2009

Re: CT: URI patterns

From: Jo Rabin <jrabin@mtld.mobi>
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2009 11:32:06 +0100
Message-ID: <4AC090A6.7060109@mtld.mobi>
To: Public BPWG <public-bpwg@w3.org>
Hi Chaals

We considered other URI patters and they were dropped as part of the 
normative/non-normative heuristic discussions under ISSUE-288 and 
resolved in March [1].

[1] http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/public-bpwg/2009Mar/0174.html

Of course any resolution is open to being torn up and contradicted by a 
subsequent resolution, but before doing so I would appreciate detailed 
commentary as to why that is necessary given the depth of previous 
discussion on the topic.

FWIW as a passionate fan of URI Patterns for Grouping of resources I'd 
be happy to use that reference but for a list of 1 pattern it may be a 
bit excessive.

Jo

On Mon, 28 Sep 2009 10:07:59 +0200, Phil Archer <phila@w3.org> wrote:

 > If you'll forgive me crossing my boundaries here...
 >
 > Appendix E assumes that everyone understands what *.mobi means. I agree
 > with Charles that other patterns are, de facto, associated with mobile.
 >
 > Without wishing to add to the burden, one could make this idea a little
 > more extensible and less arbitrary with reference to [1]. [...]
 >
 > Something like 'following the method for defining URI patterns as given
 > in POWDER Grouping of Resources, we note the following patterns...'

 > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/REC-powder-grouping-20090901/#wild

Yes, providing a pointer that explains what the syntax means (or even
copying it) would be a good idea.

cheers

Chaals

-- 
Charles McCathieNevile  Opera Software, Standards Group
      je parle franšais -- hablo espa˝ol -- jeg lŠrer norsk
http://my.opera.com/chaals       Try Opera: http://www.opera.com
Received on Monday, 28 September 2009 10:32:59 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:43:01 UTC