W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html@w3.org > September 2007

Re: Spec review: "URI (or IRI)"

From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
Date: Sun, 02 Sep 2007 20:13:42 +0200
Message-ID: <46DAFD56.8090303@gmx.de>
To: Robert Burns <rob@robburns.com>
CC: "public-html@w3.org" <public-html@w3.org>

Robert Burns wrote:
> ...
> I wonder if we shouldn't be more specific and use the locator term when 
> it applies. I'm not sure if any RFC deals with this, but many of the 
> attributes that take IRIs in HTML5 really only take locators and not the 
> broader identifier (is there an RFC on IRLs?).  If an attribute is going 
> to take IRI as its data type, then I think we should clearly define what 
> it means when the IRI is not a locator. For example, the proposal I made 
> on associating attributions, citations, and references, where I defined 
> how URNs (or would it be IRNs?) would be used[1].
> 
> So I think there are two axes to deal with: 1) ASCII  v Unicode and 2) 
> Locator and Name versus Identifier.
> ...

Not sure. URLs can be used as names, when chosen carefully (namespace 
names come to mind). URNs can be used as locators, if people choose to 
define and implement a protocol. (See also 
<http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc3986#section-1.1.3>).

Can you elaborate where the distinction is meaningful in the context of 
HTML?

Best regards, Julian
Received on Sunday, 2 September 2007 18:13:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 9 May 2012 00:16:07 GMT