W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > uri@w3.org > August 2001

Re: QName URI Scheme Re-Visited, Revised, and Revealing

From: Jason Diamond <jason@injektilo.org>
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2001 10:46:39 -0700
Message-ID: <08e801c12d8d$e6ade800$040210ac@injektilo2>
To: "Sean B. Palmer" <sean@mysterylights.com>, <Patrick.Stickler@nokia.com>
Cc: <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>, <uri@w3.org>

> Now, there are only two errors with your URI scheme. The first is that the
> characters "{" and "}" are disallowed in URIs per section 2.4.3 of RFC
> 2396. This can be easily gotten round by using "(" and ")" instead, e.g.:-
>
>      qn:(http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml)title
>
> that's a shame because I often use "{}" for QNames.

I though that we had more flexibility in defining URIs based on the scheme.

Section 3 says:

   "The URI syntax is dependent upon the scheme.  In general, absolute
   URI are written as follows:

      <scheme>:<scheme-specific-part>

   An absolute URI contains the name of the scheme being used (<scheme>)
   followed by a colon (":") and then a string (the <scheme-specific-
   part>) whose interpretation depends on the scheme.

   The URI syntax does not require that the scheme-specific-part have
   any general structure or set of semantics which is common among all
   URI."

Does a mailto URI fit the grammar given in 2396?

Jason.
Received on Saturday, 25 August 2001 13:44:25 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 13 January 2011 12:15:29 GMT