W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-rdf-interest@w3.org > May 2001

Re: Another fragment issue

From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@ebuilt.com>
Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 18:21:57 -0700
To: Aaron Swartz <aswartz@swartzfam.com>
Cc: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>, RDF Interest <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20010525182157.D1132@waka.ebuilt.net>
> The issues are all clearly very complicated, but the pointers you provide
> seem to elaborate on how fragment identifiers are ineffective for discussing
> portions of resources -- the same conclusion that led Roy not to define them
> as such.
> 
> I still believe your terminology definitions were the first to point out the
> actually incompatibility in the specs. Roy, do you have an earlier citation?

TimBL mentioned it at the beginning of the thread:
http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-rdf-interest/2000Feb/0171.html

I am pretty sure that Dan and I, or Henrik and I, or maybe all three of us,
discussed it at some point in person long before that.  I was not involved
in the discussions of RDF.

....Roy
Received on Friday, 25 May 2001 21:24:07 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:51:49 GMT