W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > February 2002

Re: URIs vs. URIviews (was: Agenda for RDFCore WG Telecon 2002-02-15)

From: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Feb 2002 10:20:59 +0000
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.0.20020215101616.0242f360@0-mail-1.hpl.hp.com>
To: Aaron Swartz <me@aaronsw.com>
Cc: RDF Core <w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org>
At 19:57 14/02/2002 -0600, Aaron Swartz wrote:
[...]

>Sure, I came up with a proposal for this once, but I recall it being
>dismissed as crazily strange. I'd have no problem with that.
>
>http://example.org/foo#bar
>  ->
>  http://example.org/foo?frag=bar
>  or maybe
>  http://www.w3.org/2002/02-frag/?uri=http://example.org/foo&frag=bar

Does that mean you agree that http://example.org/foo#bar does name a resource?
[...]

>Hmm, can you provide a pointer to your email? I didn't see it on the issue
>list or in the www-tag archives.

Looks like a communications cockup.  I sent it in reply to a message 
soliciting input to the tag.  I would have thought that sufficient, but 
apparently not, so I've just resent it to the tag list.  I'm offline - 
can't do a pointer.

[...]...

>I hope they're identified by URIs and not URIviews. ;-)

Cute.  I pinched that idea for an addendum to the message to the tag.

Brian
Received on Friday, 15 February 2002 05:37:25 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 3 September 2003 09:45:12 EDT