RE: proposed fix for 5741

I am ok with either "URI reference" or "URI-reference".

Sandy, do you have a comment on 2.c.iii ?


From: Smith, Virginia (HP Software) [mailto:virginia.smith@hp.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 9:55 PM
To: Kumar Pandit; public-sml@w3.org
Subject: RE: proposed fix for 5741

I am ok as follows:


-          URI-reference should be "URI reference" as in the original text. While it is true that the text in RFC 3986 uses "URI-reference", I think that is a result of the grammar reference. The section title is "URI reference". Looking at RFC 3987 we do not see that '-' used in URI reference or IRI reference. And I don't see the '-' used elsewhere also. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Resource_Identifier

-          I defer to Sandy on 2.c.iii (implementation variances ok?)
--
ginny

From: public-sml-request@w3.org [mailto:public-sml-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Kumar Pandit
Sent: Monday, August 25, 2008 9:57 PM
To: public-sml@w3.org
Cc: Kumar Pandit
Subject: proposed fix for 5741

Here is a diff for the proposed fix for 5741. Please take a look and let me know if you agree (or disagree) with it. I would like to get closure on it before the Thu call if possible. Thanks for your cooperation.