W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-fragment@w3.org > April 2010

Re: Terminology: fragment identifier part of an URI?

From: Silvia Pfeiffer <silviapfeiffer1@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 28 Apr 2010 22:51:26 +1000
Message-ID: <m2l2c0e02831004280551z2915f53dk9a3b88c642dfa15d@mail.gmail.com>
To: raphael.troncy@eurecom.fr
Cc: Sami Vaarala <sami.vaarala@codebay.fi>, Conrad Parker <conrad@metadecks.org>, public-media-fragment@w3.org
2010/4/28 RaphaŽl Troncy <raphael.troncy@cwi.nl>:
> Dear Sami, Silvia,
>
>>> According to RFC 3986, the term "URI" does not include relative
>>> references. In this document, we want to cover both, URIs and relative
>>> references. This requires us to use the term "URI reference" according
>>> to RC 3986. For simplicity reasons, this document, however, only uses
>>> the term 'media fragment URI' in place of 'media fragment URI
>>> reference'.
>>
>> This sounds good to me :)
>
> Thanks for your comment and the discussion.
> @Silvia: I slightly changed your paragraph and updated correspondingly the
> latest editor's draft:
>
> "According to RFC 3986, the term "URI" does not include relative
> references. In this document, we consider both URIs and relative
> references. Consequently, we use the term "URI reference" as defined in RFC
> 3986 (section 4.1). For simplicity reasons, this document, however, only
> uses the term "media fragment URI" in place of "media fragment URI
> reference"."

OK, cool, no worries.

How is WWW Conf?

Cheers,
Silvia.
Received on Wednesday, 28 April 2010 12:52:19 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 21 September 2011 12:13:38 GMT