- From: Kingsley Idehen <kidehen@openlinksw.com>
- Date: Wed, 21 Nov 2012 09:03:15 -0500
- To: public-webid@w3.org
- Message-ID: <50ACDF23.7060906@openlinksw.com>
On 11/21/12 8:10 AM, Henry Story wrote: >> >> >> I think there Larry makes a good point with regard to URI/URLs. >> Now that we have >> agreed to restrict to http/https URI's we should use the URI >> term, as that deals >> with internationalisation. >> >> >> you mean IRI right? That was also part of Antoine's feedback to >> switch from URI to IRI. > > We go for what we need. Larry wrote: > > "The design proposed is one where there is a WebID protocol element > whose value resembles a URL (not a URI? Surely you are not planning on > requiring the non-English world to use ASCII WebIDs?) " > > It seems that URIs are enough for that problem. You are being selective again. You use IRI once internationalization is a factor, end of story. -- Regards, Kingsley Idehen Founder & CEO OpenLink Software Company Web: http://www.openlinksw.com Personal Weblog: http://www.openlinksw.com/blog/~kidehen Twitter/Identi.ca handle: @kidehen Google+ Profile: https://plus.google.com/112399767740508618350/about LinkedIn Profile: http://www.linkedin.com/in/kidehen
Attachments
- application/pkcs7-signature attachment: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
Received on Wednesday, 21 November 2012 14:03:41 UTC