W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-its@w3.org > July to September 2006

Re: Exploring the change from Ref to Uri

From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2006 16:15:11 +0900
Message-Id: <6.0.0.20.2.20060726161256.08fca4d0@localhost>
To: Felix Sasaki <fsasaki@w3.org>, Yves Savourel <ysavourel@translate.com>
Cc: public-i18n-its@w3.org

I agree with Felix (and others). On top of that, I hope that
ITS actually uses IRIs, not URIs, in which case the name SomethingUri
may actually be more confusing than helpful.

[In the case that ITS only uses URIs and does not allow IRIs,
that would be a serious mistake that should be fixed quickly.]

Regards,   Martin.

At 00:00 06/07/26, Felix Sasaki wrote:
>Hi Yves, all,
>
>I'm not sure if the change really makes things clearer. Looking at other
>vocabularies which require an URI data type, I don't find one with the
>*name* "URI". For example, HTML has the href attribute, XLink as well, ...
>
>should we really name the attributes after their data type, or isn't
>naming after their function the common way? I am not sure if the term
>URI is common enough for that purpose.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Felix
>
>
>
>Yves Savourel wrote:
>> Hello everyone,
>> 
>> My action item
>> _http://www.w3.org/2006/07/24-i18nits-minutes.html#action05_ was to look
>> at the possibility of renaming of all our 'xyzRef' and 'xyzRefPointer'
>> to 'xyzUri' and 'xyzUriPointer'.
>> 
>> This was a thought from Christian to clarify better the value held by
>> the "Ref" attributes when we looked at the isssue #3494 during today's
>> call (_http://www.w3.org/2006/07/24-i18nits-minutes.html#item06_).
>> 
>> 
>> -- Rational:
>> 
>> The content/values of the nodes pointed by all xyzRef attributes are
>> always URI. We might as well make this clear by using 'Uri' in the name
>> of the attributes. Using the more generic 'Ref' could possibly lead to
>> thinking that other types of value (e.g. an ID) could be used.
>> 
>> 
>> -- Things we would have to rename:
>> 
>> locNoteRef                      ->      locNoteUri
>> locNoteRefPointer               ->      locNoteUriPointer
>> termInfoRef                     ->      termInfoUri
>> termInfoRefPointer      ->      termInfoUriPointer
>> 
>> 
>> -- Pros:
>> 
>> - More specific, and therefore clearer.
>> - Last chance to make that change.
>> - It would be consistant with uri in <its:ns> where we call the URI 'uri'.
>> 
>> 
>> -- Cons:
>> 
>> - May could be seen as a substantive change by some(?)
>> - Lot of references and examples, to change.
>> 
>> 
>> -- Personnal opinion:
>> 
>> I would think it's probably a good idea to change the attribute names
>> from 'Ref' to 'Uri'.
>> 
>> 
>> Cheers,
>> -yves
>> 
>> 
>
>
>
>Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
>Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature
>Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc"
>
>-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
>Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32)
>Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
>iD8DBQFExjIacU6f2Avofx4RAq9ZAJ90BQa2V3rf0R3OcceWIW2qiEdFZQCgzADA
>MYLo7bHOb2N9lmGg8ecrK1k=
>=7qyp
>-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


#-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-#-#  http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp       mailto:duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp     
Received on Wednesday, 26 July 2006 10:05:34 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:43:08 UTC