W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org > January 2003

RE: Type of (the denotation of) a plain literal

From: Graham Klyne <GK@NineByNine.org>
Date: Thu, 16 Jan 2003 13:18:04 +0000
Message-Id: <>
To: Brian McBride <bwm@hplb.hpl.hp.com>, "Peter F. Patel-Schneider" <pfps@research.bell-labs.com>
Cc: w3c-rdfcore-wg@w3.org

At 06:15 AM 1/16/03 -0500, Peter F. Patel-Schneider wrote:
>I note that the reference to RFC 3066 is not yet fixed in RDF Concepts.

Peter,  I missed your previous comment.  Thanks for raising it again.



I think this should be fixed in LCC if possible;  if not I've noted it in 
my issues list anyway, so it doesn't fall through the cracks.

In text:
RFC 3066 - Tags for the Identification of Languages, H. Alvestrand, IETF, 
January 2001. This document is http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc3066.txt.

the phrase "RFC 3066 - Tags for the Identification of Languages" is 
hyperlinked to "http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc2279.txt".

The hyperlink *should* be to "http://www.isi.edu/in-notes/rfc3066.txt"



this raises a general comment about RFC citations, which we (or you as 
series editor) might want to consider as a cleanup item in the last-call 

Proposed above is a minimal change, but I note that we're not very 
consistent about which of the several URLs we might use for linking to 
RFCs; e.g.
all return the same document.

As all RFCs are published by the RFC editor, it might be argued that the 
rfc-editor.org URL (HTTP flavour) is a better choice.  That is also the 
(HTTP) URL ultimately used by the RFC editor's search service.

Should we care about this?


Graham Klyne
Received on Thursday, 16 January 2003 08:13:55 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 14:54:03 UTC