W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > August 2006

Re: TAG Issue proposal: URIs should not be hierarchical

From: Fernando Franco <avoid.spam.account@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 27 Aug 2006 22:21:24 -0300
Message-ID: <000601c6ca40$4af7a860$eb8c31c8@enterprise>
To: "W3C-TAG" <www-tag@w3.org>
Cc: "Karl Dubost" <karl@w3.org>

Hi, Karl.

Today URIs can be something like
I reckon they should only be

Please see:
(which contains the true rationale)

I did check the specs, btw, and a lot of them mention the hierarchical thing
in no uncertain terms.

This contains an extra paragraph about hierarchies-classifications and their
problems in xml:

Fernando Franco

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Karl Dubost" <karl@w3.org>
To: "Fernando Franco" <avoid.spam.account@gmail.com>
Cc: "W3C-TAG" <www-tag@w3.org>
Sent: Sunday, August 27, 2006 6:50 PM
Subject: Re: TAG Issue proposal: URIs should not be hierarchical

Le 26 août 06 à 23:46, Fernando Franco a écrit :
> URIs are names.
> Names are not hierarchical.
> Ergo, URIs should not be hierarchical.
> URIs should not be hierarchical.
> URIs have a hierarchical part.
> Ergo, URIs are wrong.

1. Define hierarchical
2. Explain what do you think is hierarchical in an URI?

Just to be sure of understanding the issue.

Karl Dubost - http://www.w3.org/People/karl/
W3C Conformance Manager, QA Activity Lead
   QA Weblog - http://www.w3.org/QA/
      *** Be Strict To Be Cool ***
Received on Monday, 28 August 2006 01:22:03 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:49 UTC