- From: Conrad Parker <conrad@metadecks.org>
- Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 10:59:09 +0900
- To: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
- Cc: Sami Vaarala <sami.vaarala@codebay.fi>, public-media-fragment@w3.org
On 15 April 2010 10:19, Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com> wrote: > If you continue reading RFC 3986 to section 4.1, you will find > > URI-reference = URI / relative-ref > > We did not want to exclude "relative-ref" from the kinds of fragment > URI references that we wanted to refer to. Thus, a "URI" is actually a > subset of "URI reference". that sounds clearer. So instead of talking about "URIs containing fragments" we should say that this specification covers "URI references containing fragment identifiers", and restate that these URI references may be URIs or relative references. As Sami points out, the phrase "URIs that contain a fragment are actually not URIs" is still incorrect. Conrad. > On Thu, Apr 15, 2010 at 5:03 AM, Sami Vaarala <sami.vaarala@codebay.fi> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> A minor terminology nit: >> >> The current draft (http://www.w3.org/TR/2010/WD-media-frags-20100413/) >> states in Section 2.1 that: >> >> According to RFC 3986, URIs that contain a fragment are actually not >> URIs, but URI references relative to the namespace of another URI. >> >> Based on my reading RFC 3986, this seems incorrect. >> >> RFC 3986, Section 3: >> >> URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] [ "#" fragment ] >> >> Section 3 also gives an "example URI": >> >> foo://example.com:8042/over/there?name=ferret#nose >> >> The "URI" production refers to the generix syntax for a URI. The >> "absolute-URI" production does not include a fragment identifier, but >> is not intended to be the only URI format. RFC 3986, Section 4.3: >> >> Some protocol elements allow only the absolute form of a URI without >> a fragment identifier. For example, defining a base URI for later >> use by relative references calls for an absolute-URI syntax rule that >> does not allow a fragment. >> >> absolute-URI = scheme ":" hier-part [ "?" query ] >> >> This also implies that absolute-URIs are only a subset of all URIs. >> >> Best regards, >> >> -Sami >> -- >> Sami Vaarala >> >> >> >> > >
Received on Thursday, 15 April 2010 01:59:42 UTC