W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > July 2002

Some comments on latest draft

From: Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
Date: Mon, 08 Jul 2002 11:44:08 -0700
Message-ID: <3D29DD78.4040400@textuality.com>
To: WWW TAG <www-tag@w3.org>

Introduction: I like the sentence labeled "Open"

Limits: "This document does not address *architectural* design goals"

1. Identifiers

Last para, labeled Open and beginning "The URI Specificaation..." can be 
dropped, it adds no value.

1.1 URI schemes

This numbered list needs to be thrown out and redone.  Some specific 
comments.

- last sentence of 2nd para (about scheme == prefix) should move to top.

- list item 1.  I prefer Roy's formulation.  But doesn't it apply to any 
URI, not just HTTP URIs?

- list items 2 and 4 are talking about the same thing

One way to reorg this section: Call it "properties of URIs" and 
enumerate some, highlighting that some of them are scheme-dependent.

1.1.1 Social Expectations...

- lose first sentence, it adds nothing
- call out a framed architectural principle along the lines of "design 
and maintain your URI space with a view to persistence!"


1.2 2nd open issue - my atttempt was to reformulate the 1st framed 
principle under 1....  but maybe it works better here.

1.3 list item 3, should say *optional* fragment identifier

Might want to add a note after the trailing principle in this section 
giving official names for 1-3 in the list above.

1.4 1st sentence, does ending with a fragment imply that the URI can be 
derferenced?
Received on Monday, 8 July 2002 14:44:01 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:47:09 GMT